The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NYT Regrets/Defends Article About the Metal Drummer Who Likes Edgy Stuff
🔊 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

Yesterday, the New York Times ran two articles about an obscure heavy metal drummer in a small town in Ohio who articulates far right extremist views, such as that the media’s telling of the Lessons of George Zimmerman (whom the NYT refers to as “the white man who shot the black teenager”) was tendentious.

Today, the NYT apologized to its readers for …

Readers Accuse Us of Normalizing a Nazi Sympathizer; We Respond
By MARC LACEY NOV. 26, 2017

We have asked our national editor, Marc Lacey, to respond to feedback on our recent profile of a white nationalist.

A profile in The Times of Tony Hovater, a white nationalist and Nazi sympathizer in Ohio, elicited a huge amount of feedback this weekend, most of it sharply critical. Here’s how the piece came about, why we wrote it and why we think it was important to do so.

The genesis of the story was the aftermath of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August, the terrifying Ku Klux Klan-like images of young white men carrying tiki torches and shouting “Jews will not replace us,” and the subsequent violence that included the killing of a woman, Heather D. Heyer.

Who were those people? We assigned Richard Fausset, one of our smartest thinkers and best writers, to profile one of the far-right foot soldiers at the rally. We ended up settling on Mr. Hovater, who, it turned out, was a few years older than another Ohio man, James Alex Fields Jr., who was charged with murder after the authorities said he drove his car into a crowd of protesters, killing Ms. Heyer. …

Thus, they are practically the same guy. Why isn’t Hovater in jail too? In India they know how to deal with uppity ethnic groups: collective guilt, collective punishment.

Whatever our goal, a lot of readers found the story offensive, with many seizing on the idea we were normalizing neo-Nazi views and behavior. “How to normalize Nazis 101!” one reader wrote on Twitter. “I’m both shocked and disgusted by this article,” wrote another. “Attempting to ‘normalize’ white supremacist groups – should Never have been printed!”

Our reporter and his editors agonized over the tone and content of the article. The point of the story was not to normalize anything but to describe the degree to which hate and extremism have become far more normal in American life than many of us want to think.

Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …

We regret the degree to which the piece offended so many readers. We recognize that people can disagree on how best to tell a disagreeable story. What we think is indisputable, though, is the need to shed more light, not less, on the most extreme corners of American life and the people who inhabit them. That’s what the story, however imperfectly, tried to do.

By the way, the metal drummer in question explained his reasons in a 2016 essay. Here are drummer Tony Hovater’s last two paragraphs:

I really think a lot of the anger from both sides started and grew from the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman case. We learned that simple self defense was now a mortal sin if your attacker is darker than you. To this day, people still believe that Trayvon was murdered by a racist white man. Or that Michael Brown had his hands up, beginning for his life when he was shot. No amount of physical evidence will ever convince them. Many have picked up on the outright lies that were reported during these events by supposed trusted news sources and won’t soon forget it.

The Martin, and Brown cases have done more to increase white racial consciousness than we could have hoped to with any amount of activism. White resentment is going to continue to grow faster and faster if the media keeps on its current track. I wouldn’t be surprised if a white secessionist movement starts independent of alt-right circles as a response either. If that happens, I hope they have the foresight to keep the ‘white privilege’ types out. Nobody wants to start a new society with the likes of Macklemore chick or that Maddow fellow, do they?

 
Hide 247 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Clyde says:

    This third one (in a series?) is called extending the click bait. This article has 782 comments so you can see it has Times readers in a self righteous tizzy. Imagine you are a NY Times reader relaxing on a nice sunny Sunday, when Tony Hovater comes along to trigger you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    That's a 99.9%ile comment.
    , @27 year old
    >extending the click bait.

    Nailed it. But I also think there is something in the ego of the NYT staff that they can't stand being called out by their own fans. They're condescending douchebags even to the people who agree with them and love them, like shut up peasants we're the professionals here and how dare you judge us on how we Do Our Jobs?

    >article has 782 comments

    Thanksgiving is a bad time to be a SJW type, they're looking for distractions lol
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/nyt-regretsdefends-article-about-the-metal-drummer-who-likes-edgy-ideas/#comment-2094185
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Ivy says:

    What we think is indisputable, though, is the need to shed more light, not less, on the most extreme corners of American life and the people who inhabit them. That’s what the story, however imperfectly, tried to do.

    Extreme corners? Place your dead pool bets on their selection of next subjects.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Daniel H says:

    Clearest expression yet why the NY Times is doomed as a business and will only exist as a charity in the future. They have forgotten (or maybe, for decades, haven’t even known) what business they are in. They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion. The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, “Pinch” Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers. Everything else is beside the point. A circle-jerk of virtue signaling white SJW readers is not valuable enough for your paying customers to continue to do so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colleen Pater
    I was a 21 year old fairly liberal slightly libertarian hippie in 78 ( remember 'the movements' buzzword back then was freedom not equality) when I may have coined the phrase jew york times when some older jewish friends tried to cite it as an appeal to authority in an argument we were having. In short 40 years ago even a kid from a lefty intellectual family understood both the times politics and how they came about their politics.It survived because it was a status symbol, a social currency, one of those ways we recognized each other.I suppose thats still why it survives why leftism survives, I couldn't hang hang on the pre V2 jesuits instilled a commitment to reason transcended class.
    , @European-American

    The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, “Pinch” Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers.
     
    Not anymore. The Times now makes more money from subscribers than from advertisers.

    Twenty years ago, advertising revenue made up 63 percent of the paper’s revenues, while subscription revenue accounted for 27 percent. As of Q1, those numbers are nearly inverted: Subscriptions account for 61 percent and advertising represents 33 percent of the top line.

    How the New York Times saved itself
    Subscriptions, not ads.
    BY PETER KAFKA AND RANI MOLLA MAY 4, 2017, 5:22PM EDT
    https://www.recode.net/2017/5/4/15550052/new-york-times-subscription-advertising-revenue-chart

     

    More about how the NYT is increasingly focusing on subscribers, not advertisers:
    https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/fn_nyt_chart.svg
    https://www.wired.com/2017/02/new-york-times-digital-journalism/

    Smart tech analysts like Ben Thompson have explained why general news services have become pretty useless to advertisers.
    https://stratechery.com/2015/popping-the-publishing-bubble/

    So if you think the NYT has become ever more of a niche SJW mouthpiece and ever less a neutral news source, well, there’s a sound business reason for that.
    , @rogue-one
    NYTimes has a lot of influence and will retain it for near to medium term future. It is premier newspaper of the country and sets the cultural agenda for other newspapers to follow.

    If it doesn't make money, some billionaire will bail it out (on expectation that nytimes never mention his monopoly).
    , @Verymuchalive
    The Guardian only exists as a Charity ( OK, Trust, more or less same thing ) and has done for years. It continually solicites donations from its readers, even though its editor is a multi-millionaire.
    , @Bill

    They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion.
     
    That's the business they are in. If they stop producing this type of output, they will either be taken over or replaced.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Reminds me of the Monty Python skit about cannabalism in the Royal Navy…”We here at the BBC want to apologize for our recent story about cannabalism in the Royal Navy”……”Dear Sir….I want to object to the BBC’s recent story on cannabalism in the Royal Navy….Sincerely……..Admiral……..in a white wine sauce..”….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Forbes says:

    Alternative NYT: We denounced Mr. Hovater as reprehensible using all the ugly names we could muster and readers still thought we “normalized” him. Having already taken outrage to 11, we couldn’t find 12 on the scale. Groveling apology to follow…

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Alternative NYT: We denounced Mr. Hovater as reprehensible using all the ugly names we could muster and readers still thought we “normalized” him.
     
    Honestly, this is what happens to the guys whenever they try to publish anything near "balanced", they get decried as heretics, insufficiently pious, et, so you can hardly blame them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Tim says:

    When you expose “extremist views” that are totally reasonable, and everybody secretly agrees with, you have to ask yourself, who’s the extremist here?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    There is always a risk that someone with opposing views can come across quite sympathetic. That is why the media choose to keep the likes of David Duke in the spotlight. He will garner no sympathy.
    , @Guy de Champlagne
    Would you consider all of these ideas "reasonable"? https://www.tradworker.org/points/

    Is there any doubt the author could have totally crucified this guy in the eyes of the readers by focusing on the right components of his ideology.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. It is a ridiculous article. The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    There are any number of white nationalist who deserve the kind of sympathetic, thoughtful portrayal that this guy got but neo nazis don’t.

    Read More
    • Agree: James Kabala
    • Troll: Kevin C.
    • Replies: @Curle
    Regarding neo-Nazis, “ the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.”

    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?
    , @Emblematic
    "Nazi" is and always has been an abuse word. It was invented as an abuse word. The Germans never called themselves Nazis. Can you imagine having a serious discussion about the Vietnam War while referring to Vietnamese as "Gooks"? The reason people such as the New York Times use the word Nazi is to demonize the person they are targeting with that label. And it works. Hence the liberal hysteria about the alt-right instead of serious analysis.
    , @anon
    The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    I suppose that's one way of looking at things. On the other hand, every time the NYT advocates for some war in the Middle East, they gloss over the nastiness and gore inherent in what that means too. So they have some practice.
    , @Jack Hanson
    You forgot "vile" in your litany of SJW warding words.
    , @reiner Tor
    We shouldn't be lazy and accept the leftist Narrative, especially not if it's glaringly stupid.

    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler. You know, actual Nazis didn't deny the holocaust, they condoned it. While the actual methods of the holocaust were (badly guarded) state secrets, Hitler didn't really deny the holocaust, he frequently and openly talked in his speeches about how Jewry was disappearing from Europe, and how his "prophecy" made in 1939 about a world war resulting in the destruction of European Jewry was coming true.

    Nazis were bad because they committed the holocaust, not because they denied it. (See above, it's even questionable how much they actually denied it.) Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad, and because he also worships Hitler, resolves the contradiction by denying the holocaust even happened.

    So holocaust-deniers are not that bad (at least not necessarily bad): presumably they wouldn't want to do something which they consider bad, so they wouldn't commit the holocaust, even if they worship Hitler. They are not really Nazis.

    Okay, they might lie about it just so that they have another shot at committing another holocaust, but since A) they have no chance of actually coming to power and B) they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. David says:
    @Clyde
    This third one (in a series?) is called extending the click bait. This article has 782 comments so you can see it has Times readers in a self righteous tizzy. Imagine you are a NY Times reader relaxing on a nice sunny Sunday, when Tony Hovater comes along to trigger you.

    That’s a 99.9%ile comment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. newrouter says:

    ” on the most extreme corners of American life and the people who inhabit them.”

    So more coverage of the insanity that is today’s academia?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Amigo says:

    Heather Heyer died of a heart attack, brought on because she was an very obese chain smoker. I never came across a video showing her actually getting hit (maybe the car hit her on the leg). Had she been a normal sized person who didn’t smoke she would have just been another witness to the whole mess.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.
    , @Chris Mallory
    If your actions cause a bystander to have a heart attack, depending on state law, you can be charged with their death.

    Her poor health is not a defense, look up the eggshell doctrine.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Hovater isn’t alone: Saint Michael of Ferguson and Baby TrayTray were serious redpill events that pushed a lot of people into considering the tenets of the alt right. If you ask many alt right people what their turning point was, a lot of them will point to these incidents. They were big enough events to where I’d say without them, Trump wouldn’t have been elected. We’d either have Hillary or some loser like Jeb or Marco instead.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    Those stories were quite harmful to the power of the msm to define the narrative, because the msm stories on both were so obviously bad.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. eah says:

    who was charged with murder after the authorities said he drove his car into a crowd of protesters, killing Ms. Heyer.

    So in reaction to a piece where media complicity in the malicious prosecution of Zimmerman was mentioned, the NYT tosses in another more recent media lie: that morbidly obese smoker Heyer was killed by a car.

    Heather Heyer Died of a Heart Attack

    Previously here on unz.com:

    The Fat Heather Heyer Hoax

    Reminiscent of the Flüchtlingskrise — “Lügenpresse”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    Straw man.
    Look up the "eggshell doctrine".
    Frailty of a victim is not a defense. If you punch a man who, for what ever reason, has a paper thin skull and he dies, you will be charged with his death. Doesn't matter if you knew about the condition of the skull or not. Doesn't matter if the punch would not have affect a man with a normal skull. You take your victim as you find them.

    If you commit a crime against a group of people and one of them dies of a heart attack, depending upon state law you might be charged with their death.

    The question here is to what degree was the driver of the car culpable for the car hitting the group.

    Was it purely an accident? He still might face civil penalties, even if it was an accident.
    Was it manslaughter? Pre-meditated?

    There are cases from Wisconsin, Louisiana, and Maine in the past 5 years where a bystander died of a heart attack and the person who perpetrated the act which lead to the death was charged.

    There has been a lot of speculation about the driver's motives and state of mind. But until the issue is decided in court that is all it is, speculation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. The NYT and others keep beating the “They are Nazis” drum. I wonder what many teens and early 20 somethings know about Nazis other than the holocaust

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Early sixty-somethings can remember when "holocaust" was prefaced with "nuclear".
    , @Guy de Champlagne
    What could have possibly led the times to the conclusion that this guy was some kind of nazi? The swastikas? The neo nazi political party that he founded? Truly one of life's great mysteries.
    , @Cagey Beast
    The word "holocaust" seems to have been used quite often to describe the firebombing of civilians by the Germans or of Japanese and German civilians being firebombed by the Allies, back when people used to feel lousy about that.
    , @Curle
    I remember the NYT telling us Nixon, Reagan, Lee Atwater, the Boy Scouts and those who might cut NPR funding were Nazis. Might I presume that this drummer proposes to cut NPR funding?
    , @jorge videla (BGI volunteer)
    like the great success the party's economic policies were?
    like its leaders' extreme pro animal rights position?
    like the wansee conference occurred 1 month after the US declared war, and germany knew it was going to lose?
    like the allies declared war before germany had conquered any territory it hadn't been deprived of by versailles?
    etc. etc. etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Tiny Duck says:

    Look back on the NYT coverage of Michael Brown as “not an angel” and compare it to this. When someone is white, middle class, polite, they regard them as basically nice, even though, puzzlingly, they are a Nazi. When someone is black, poor, and a victim of police violence, they focus on the fact that they have been known to shoplift and to make rap songs that include vulgar language. If the NYT think long and hard about this discrepancy they will learn what they need to know about what is wrong with this coverage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Curle
    Michael Brown cannot appropriately be categorized as anything other than a victim of his own poor behavior and decisions.
    , @Forbes
    Must be a Tiny Dick impostor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Buffalo Joe
    The NYT and others keep beating the "They are Nazis" drum. I wonder what many teens and early 20 somethings know about Nazis other than the holocaust

    Early sixty-somethings can remember when “holocaust” was prefaced with “nuclear”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    I don't remember nuclear holocaust until (long) after the description of the WW II concentration camp explanation was condensed to the one-word "holocaust." And that was long after my formal schooling ended.

    Nuclear holocaust seems remnant of Reagan era media hysteria.
    , @jorge videla (BGI volunteer)
    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holocaust&year_start=1800&year_end=2010&corpus=0&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolocaust%3B%2Cc0
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. It’s interesting that Eric Garner lost his martyrdom in favor of Heather Heyer. They both had a kind of static health where they could roll out of bed in the morning but any additional stress was enough to put them over the limit into cardiac arrest. The NYT should send their most extremely obese reporter to Hovater’s house and arrange some loud/stressful noises, then they could potentially pin a murderer label on him as well when the inevitable happens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. @Buffalo Joe
    The NYT and others keep beating the "They are Nazis" drum. I wonder what many teens and early 20 somethings know about Nazis other than the holocaust

    What could have possibly led the times to the conclusion that this guy was some kind of nazi? The swastikas? The neo nazi political party that he founded? Truly one of life’s great mysteries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. syonredux says:

    Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people

    How eloquent. No wonder he won the National Magazine Award….

    and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …

    But don’t worry….the final solution to the problem of White people in America is nearing completion….

    Fifty years after passage of the landmark law that rewrote U.S. immigration policy, nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States, pushing the country’s foreign-born share to a near record 14%. For the past half-century, these modern-era immigrants and their descendants have accounted for just over half the nation’s population growth and have reshaped its racial and ethnic composition.

    Looking ahead, new Pew Research Center U.S. population projections show that if current demographic trends continue, future immigrants and their descendants will be an even bigger source of population growth. Between 2015 and 2065, they are projected to account for 88% of the U.S. population increase, or 103 million people, as the nation grows to 441 million.

    As a result of its changed makeup and rapid growth, new immigration since 1965 has altered the nation’s racial and ethnic composition. In 1965, 84% of Americans were non-Hispanic whites. By 2015, that share had declined to 62%. Meanwhile, the Hispanic share of the U.S. population rose from 4% in 1965 to 18% in 2015.

    The Pew Research analysis shows that without any post-1965 immigration, the nation’s racial and ethnic composition would be very different today: 75% white, 14% black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.

    The country’s overall population will feel the impact of these shifts. Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055 and 46% by 2065.

    http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes

    a senior reporter at Mother Jones
     
    No need to clue-in NYT's readers to the political leanings of Mother Jones. Conservatives, far right, alt-right, extreme right, even center-right gets prefaced. Mother Jones is just another reputable everyday rag of common sense reporting. That everyone to the right of Mother Jones is a Nazi has been a standard of communist talking points since, what, 1939?
    , @Jack D
    You have to learn to say yes. Agree and amplify. The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don't understand that - if Steve said this then most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won't permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing. You'll be damned if you agree with that MJ reporter about ANYTHING.
    , @Dr. X

    Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people...
     
    This is true, but the meaning that one takes from this statement, and the context, is what's important.

    How is this a true statement? Well, from the founding of this nation until 1965 or so, "normal ass white people" pretty much universally believed the following:

    1. America is a white nation built by and for white people
    2. Homosexuals are mentally ill
    3. Transgenders are even more mentally ill
    4. The role of woman is to "stand by her man" and raise his children
    5. Homosexuals, transgenders, and women don't belong in the military
    6. Communism is bad
    7. If a white man got his ass out of bed in the morning and put in an honest day's work, he could not only support his family, but get ahead in life.

    Today, if you believe #1-6 you are seen literally as a "Nazi" (and #7 is no longer true). Today you are seen as a Nazi because the culture has become inverted 180 degrees; women, gays, blacks, illegals and transgenders are holy and pure, and the white man is a satanic demon.

    So whether or not the white man is an actual Nazi or not he might as well be one, because 1) the ruling caste is going to call him one anyway, and 2) the "Nazis" in Germany were a working class movement (which, admittedly, got out of hand due to the fanatical leadership) but in fact they pretty much agreed with "all of the above," as did normal Americans for the first 180-190 years of our existence.

    , @Random Lurker
    But are they “normal-ass white people” or “normal ass-white people”? Hmm..
    , @jorge videla (BGI volunteer)
    Die Endlösung der Weißefrage
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. What would be worse for the Establishment than having a country full of young, alienated White people who are neo-Nazis? Having a country full of young, alienated White people who aren’t neo-Nazis. What if the American liberal consensus is faced with millions of articulate, even-tempered young Whites who have simply chosen to redraw their mental map of the world after comparing reality to the official narrative they’d been given in school?

    People should have a look at this video to get a sense of what I mean:

    A longer YouTube video, called “The Perils of Civic Nationalism” by “Blonde in the Belly of the Beast” lays out similar arguments over 12 minutes. These are two examples of White people simply abandoning the grand narrative we’d all been told since at least the mid-1960s. No neo-Nazism was required to perform this manoeuvre.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I have no clue what was the problem with this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @eah
    who was charged with murder after the authorities said he drove his car into a crowd of protesters, killing Ms. Heyer.

    So in reaction to a piece where media complicity in the malicious prosecution of Zimmerman was mentioned, the NYT tosses in another more recent media lie: that morbidly obese smoker Heyer was killed by a car.

    Heather Heyer Died of a Heart Attack

    Previously here on unz.com:

    The Fat Heather Heyer Hoax

    Reminiscent of the Flüchtlingskrise -- "Lügenpresse"

    https://www.bitchute.com/torrent/7995/5QwTqTZiCCVd.jpg

    Straw man.
    Look up the “eggshell doctrine”.
    Frailty of a victim is not a defense. If you punch a man who, for what ever reason, has a paper thin skull and he dies, you will be charged with his death. Doesn’t matter if you knew about the condition of the skull or not. Doesn’t matter if the punch would not have affect a man with a normal skull. You take your victim as you find them.

    If you commit a crime against a group of people and one of them dies of a heart attack, depending upon state law you might be charged with their death.

    The question here is to what degree was the driver of the car culpable for the car hitting the group.

    Was it purely an accident? He still might face civil penalties, even if it was an accident.
    Was it manslaughter? Pre-meditated?

    There are cases from Wisconsin, Louisiana, and Maine in the past 5 years where a bystander died of a heart attack and the person who perpetrated the act which lead to the death was charged.

    There has been a lot of speculation about the driver’s motives and state of mind. But until the issue is decided in court that is all it is, speculation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    If you punch a man who, for what ever reason, has a paper thin skull and he dies, you will be charged with his death.

    She wasn't struck by the car -- the media has consistently promoted the lie that she died because she was hit by the car, which is not true -- this is basically what I wrote, and is basically what the NYT is doing: anyone reading this will assume Heyer died of traumatic injuries after being struck by the car ("killing") -- not to mention that it's a completely irrelevant/unrelated smear aimed at Hovater -- there was absolutely no reason to mention that incident here.

    There are cases from Wisconsin, Louisiana, and Maine in the past 5 years where a bystander died of a heart attack and the person who perpetrated the act which lead to the death was charged.

    Men facing murder charges after robbery bystander suffers heart attack

    One suspect refused to call an ambulance and continued to snatch money while Kneubuehl suffered the medical emergency, according to court documents...Kneubuehl had a history of heart problems, according to his crew members.

    Zimmerman was also "charged" with murder -- being charged is not the same as being convicted -- by that same, err, (legal) logic, the Alt-Right people who organized the rally could also be charged with the helicopter deaths, since otherwise it would not have been flying -- which would be absurd -- as Fields being charged with or convicted of Heyer's death would be.

    Fields should request a change of venue, maybe all the way to CA, where deliberately infecting someone with HIV is no longer a felony.

    Lastly, look up the definition of 'straw man' -- I don't think the description fits here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Forbes says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    Early sixty-somethings can remember when "holocaust" was prefaced with "nuclear".

    I don’t remember nuclear holocaust until (long) after the description of the WW II concentration camp explanation was condensed to the one-word “holocaust.” And that was long after my formal schooling ended.

    Nuclear holocaust seems remnant of Reagan era media hysteria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Nuclear holocaust seems remnant of Reagan era media hysteria.
     
    The Ngram thingy that Jorge links to below shows that "nuclear holocaust" peaked about 1983, while generic "holocaust" did so in 2000.

    But I spent the Nixon years in a college town (as a townie kid), so I'd have heard it sooner and more often.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Abe says: • Website

    I read his article and this Hovater guy is a pretty fair writer! (“SJW’s slimy tentacles”, etc.) What are the chances he is or was a denizen of iSteve? I kind of like this Fausset guy too. Seems like a pretty standard-issue punk rock/post-hard core (or whatever it’s called) Bernie Bro based on his allusions to The Minutemen and “the kind of man who starts a fire”. Wants to understand, rather than reflexively denounce. Naively thinks our system of government should be about issues and not personalities, decided by a fair trial of ideas instead of whichever wannabe-mean girl and her cackling cabal of hens and simpering nancyboys is most adept at twisting the theatrics of democracy to its ends.

    Hovater interestingly calls himself a career social media villain. What are the chances he will pivot to completely embarrass his foes? People most triggered by this NYT profile are basically calling for his blood on account of the imminent Nazi threat Hovater represents. What if part of his plan to expose SJW’s bloodthirsty hypocrisy is transitioning to some much more innocuous political identity as part of his ongoing political education?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hail

    I kind of like this Fausset guy too. Seems like a pretty standard-issue punk rock/post-hard core (or whatever it’s called) Bernie Bro based on his allusions to The Minutemen and “the kind of man who starts a fire”. Wants to understand, rather than reflexively denounce.
     
    Questions Worth Asking:

    (1) Is Richard Fausset's career over?

    (2) If so, will he salvage his career by announcing a dramatic discovery of Jewish ancestry, miracle Holocaust Survival (making Fausset a bonafide Third-Generation Holocaust Survivor), and perform a formal conversion to Judaism?
    , @Steve Sailer
    I think Ngram works fine through 2007, but not through 2008, when they must have stopped collecting data partway through the year. You have to turn off the smoothing by setting it to zero.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Forbes says:
    @syonredux

    Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people
     
    How eloquent. No wonder he won the National Magazine Award....

    and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …
     
    But don't worry....the final solution to the problem of White people in America is nearing completion....

    Fifty years after passage of the landmark law that rewrote U.S. immigration policy, nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States, pushing the country’s foreign-born share to a near record 14%. For the past half-century, these modern-era immigrants and their descendants have accounted for just over half the nation’s population growth and have reshaped its racial and ethnic composition.
     

    Looking ahead, new Pew Research Center U.S. population projections show that if current demographic trends continue, future immigrants and their descendants will be an even bigger source of population growth. Between 2015 and 2065, they are projected to account for 88% of the U.S. population increase, or 103 million people, as the nation grows to 441 million.

     


    As a result of its changed makeup and rapid growth, new immigration since 1965 has altered the nation’s racial and ethnic composition. In 1965, 84% of Americans were non-Hispanic whites. By 2015, that share had declined to 62%. Meanwhile, the Hispanic share of the U.S. population rose from 4% in 1965 to 18% in 2015.
     

    The Pew Research analysis shows that without any post-1965 immigration, the nation’s racial and ethnic composition would be very different today: 75% white, 14% black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.
     

    The country’s overall population will feel the impact of these shifts. Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055 and 46% by 2065.
     
    http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

    a senior reporter at Mother Jones

    No need to clue-in NYT’s readers to the political leanings of Mother Jones. Conservatives, far right, alt-right, extreme right, even center-right gets prefaced. Mother Jones is just another reputable everyday rag of common sense reporting. That everyone to the right of Mother Jones is a Nazi has been a standard of communist talking points since, what, 1939?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Jack D says:

    Hovater:

    “To this day, people still believe that Trayvon was murdered by a racist white man.”

    This leads me to believe that when the NYT reporter called Zimmerman “the white man who shot the black teenager”, he was paraphrasing Hovater and not trying to pin Trayvon’s death on whitey.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Here’s the full paragraph in the original NYT article:

    In 2012, Mr. Hovater was incensed by the media coverage of the Trayvon Martin shooting, believing the story had been distorted to make a villain of George Zimmerman, the white man who shot the black teenager. By that time, he and Ms. Hovater had been dating for a year or two. She was a small-town girl who had fallen away from the Catholic Church (“It was just really boring”), and once considered herself liberal.
     
    It’s stated matter-of-factly by article writer Fausset that Zimmerman is white, consistent with past NYT mischaracterization.

    You’re quoting a tradworker.org article by Hovater that isn’t cited in the NYT article, so there’s no reason to assume that Fausset is referring to Hovater’s thoughts on Zimmerman’s race, which aren’t even explicitly stated in his Tradworker article, either.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. OT:
    I was just reading about the Greek Colonel’s regime of the late 1960s and early ’70s when I saw a phrase I liked: “Ethnosotirios Epanastasis” or “revolution to save the nation”. I made me think ethno-soteriology could be a field of study that dealt with the art and science of national salvation. Maybe Stephen Miller should call himself Trump’s senior ethno-soteriologist?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    He should call himself Trump's chief low-T scrawny balding cuck tribesman.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Buffalo Joe
    The NYT and others keep beating the "They are Nazis" drum. I wonder what many teens and early 20 somethings know about Nazis other than the holocaust

    The word “holocaust” seems to have been used quite often to describe the firebombing of civilians by the Germans or of Japanese and German civilians being firebombed by the Allies, back when people used to feel lousy about that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Jack D says:
    @Amigo
    Heather Heyer died of a heart attack, brought on because she was an very obese chain smoker. I never came across a video showing her actually getting hit (maybe the car hit her on the leg). Had she been a normal sized person who didn't smoke she would have just been another witness to the whole mess.

    That’s a ridiculous lie. The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type – the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don’t help your cause.

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    Was she fat though? Every picture in mainstream sources makes her look skinny but every altright source shows fat pictures of her. I honestly can't tell if the pictures of the morbidly obese woman are of the same woman or not.
    , @newrouter
    "The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest. "

    Also known as a heart attack. The coroner was just filling in the Narrative story line.
    , @Anonymous
    OT

    More from The Daily Progress; not sure if this counts as this week's hate hoax:

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/national/wire/church-vandalism-won-t-be-probed-as-bias-crime-after/article_024f70d7-8c2d-5ab4-a23e-0537d65dbe6b.html

    Prosecutors say several acts of vandalism committed at five predominantly black churches in northern New Jersey are no longer being investigated as possible bias crimes.

    ... Zuri C. Towns attended services at one of the churches as a child, Morris County Prosecutor Fredric Knapp said.
     
    , @Opinionator
    Both simultaneously could be true. So not really so "ridiculous."

    And, from the article's third paragraph:

    "The manner of Heyer’s death is still pending, a representative with the office said Monday."

    Important questions remain unanswered.

    She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese.

    What evidence do you have for this? I'm not trying to denigrate her here.

    , @Emblematic
    Her own mother said she died of a heart attack. Video of the incident shows she wasn't hit by the car.
    , @anon
    She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese.

    You are more than likely thinking of a woman who isn't Heather Heyer. Most people think Heather Heyer was the woman they saw draped over the hood of the car in an overhead shot. That woman suffered broken legs, but survived. Heather Heyer isn't shown in any of the most common photos of the scene.

    The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.


    The issue with that is that she doesn't seem to have been directly hit by his car. His car hit another car, which hit her.

    Whereas, you can also see people being directly hit by his car, at full speed, that are just tossed aside.

    So while I disagree with the idea that she died of a heart attack, her obesity almost certainly had something to do with it.

    I think the uncertainty comes from her mother stating that she died of a heart attack on TV. What I'm guessing happened is that a doctor told the family that she died instantly of "heart failure", which her mother confused with a heart attack, which is technically called "myocardial infarction".
    , @Amigo
    I get it, you like fat women. Normal people don't.

    Here she is on a stretcher. This is not pleasantly plump:

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Heather-Heyer-on-stretcher-photo-c.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. donut says:

    Steve I am disappointed you are just throwing chum in the water . I am suspicious .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Jack D says:
    @syonredux

    Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people
     
    How eloquent. No wonder he won the National Magazine Award....

    and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …
     
    But don't worry....the final solution to the problem of White people in America is nearing completion....

    Fifty years after passage of the landmark law that rewrote U.S. immigration policy, nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States, pushing the country’s foreign-born share to a near record 14%. For the past half-century, these modern-era immigrants and their descendants have accounted for just over half the nation’s population growth and have reshaped its racial and ethnic composition.
     

    Looking ahead, new Pew Research Center U.S. population projections show that if current demographic trends continue, future immigrants and their descendants will be an even bigger source of population growth. Between 2015 and 2065, they are projected to account for 88% of the U.S. population increase, or 103 million people, as the nation grows to 441 million.

     


    As a result of its changed makeup and rapid growth, new immigration since 1965 has altered the nation’s racial and ethnic composition. In 1965, 84% of Americans were non-Hispanic whites. By 2015, that share had declined to 62%. Meanwhile, the Hispanic share of the U.S. population rose from 4% in 1965 to 18% in 2015.
     

    The Pew Research analysis shows that without any post-1965 immigration, the nation’s racial and ethnic composition would be very different today: 75% white, 14% black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.
     

    The country’s overall population will feel the impact of these shifts. Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055 and 46% by 2065.
     
    http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

    You have to learn to say yes. Agree and amplify. The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don’t understand that – if Steve said this then most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won’t permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing. You’ll be damned if you agree with that MJ reporter about ANYTHING.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    I was more interested in calling attention to his pleb-tier prose style (really, "normal ass?") and to the fact that demographic change ensures that White Anglos will, in the near future, be a relic population.....
    , @JerryC

    The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don’t understand that – if Steve said this most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won’t permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing.
     
    Seems pretty clear to me the guy intended to imply that "normal ass white people" are by definition evil white supremacists. And have been since 1776 (only since 1776?). So no one should be surprised when one of them is outed as diabolical crypto-nazi.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. donut says:

    You done your daddy wrong .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. We assigned Richard Fausset, one of our smartest thinkers and best writers

    Does this mean that he gets a raise? Or does it mean that he get eased out?

    Also, the adolescent part of my brain notes that the New York Times actually quoted the words “normal ass.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    We assigned Richard Fausset, one of our smartest thinkers and best writers
     
    NYT complimenting its own writer has an air of anticipatory defensiveness.

    Would the NYT call one of its "privileged" white male writer "one of our smartest thinkers and best writers"?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. OT again:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    Was she fat though? Every picture in mainstream sources makes her look skinny but every altright source shows fat pictures of her. I honestly can’t tell if the pictures of the morbidly obese woman are of the same woman or not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Like many women, Heather appears to have changed her weight (and hair color) over time (and not for the better) but even in her "fat" pictures she is plump but not morbidly obese.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. newrouter says:
    @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    “The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest. ”

    Also known as a heart attack. The coroner was just filling in the Narrative story line.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gcochran
    A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing: only an idiot or liar would equate them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    OT

    More from The Daily Progress; not sure if this counts as this week’s hate hoax:

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/national/wire/church-vandalism-won-t-be-probed-as-bias-crime-after/article_024f70d7-8c2d-5ab4-a23e-0537d65dbe6b.html

    Prosecutors say several acts of vandalism committed at five predominantly black churches in northern New Jersey are no longer being investigated as possible bias crimes.

    … Zuri C. Towns attended services at one of the churches as a child, Morris County Prosecutor Fredric Knapp said.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    Both simultaneously could be true. So not really so “ridiculous.”

    And, from the article’s third paragraph:

    “The manner of Heyer’s death is still pending, a representative with the office said Monday.”

    Important questions remain unanswered.

    She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese.

    What evidence do you have for this? I’m not trying to denigrate her here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. syonredux says:
    @Jack D
    You have to learn to say yes. Agree and amplify. The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don't understand that - if Steve said this then most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won't permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing. You'll be damned if you agree with that MJ reporter about ANYTHING.

    I was more interested in calling attention to his pleb-tier prose style (really, “normal ass?”) and to the fact that demographic change ensures that White Anglos will, in the near future, be a relic population…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    I was more interested in calling attention to his pleb-tier prose style (really, “normal ass?”)
     
    No, you were right. Whatever ambiguity there existed in that quote is collapsed by the use of the WOKE-ifying intensifier '-ass'. It basically means: 'here I am, a privileged white person, slightly humiliating myself by trying to talk like an authentic black person. But I'm willing to suffer such minor indignities to signal unequivocally my white ally-hood to people of color and their sacred causes."

    The rest of it is an unequivocal condemnation of the US and its history. "America has been white supremacist and therefore proto-Nazi since its very founding, and therefore condemning the most egregious racists such as this Hovater fellow is a waste of time. There is no 'good' America that can be preserved by fighting the minority of 'bad' whites out there. The whole thing is structurally rotten and must be fundamentally altered by us, the enlightened vanguard, till historical America is replaced by Bizarro America, where the national story begins not with the Founding Fathers, but their slaves. Where one's claim to Americanness is inversely proportional to one's time in America, and where the real father of his country is not George Washington but President Hussein Bizarro. Amen"

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Daniel H
    Clearest expression yet why the NY Times is doomed as a business and will only exist as a charity in the future. They have forgotten (or maybe, for decades, haven't even known) what business they are in. They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion. The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, "Pinch" Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers. Everything else is beside the point. A circle-jerk of virtue signaling white SJW readers is not valuable enough for your paying customers to continue to do so.

    I was a 21 year old fairly liberal slightly libertarian hippie in 78 ( remember ‘the movements’ buzzword back then was freedom not equality) when I may have coined the phrase jew york times when some older jewish friends tried to cite it as an appeal to authority in an argument we were having. In short 40 years ago even a kid from a lefty intellectual family understood both the times politics and how they came about their politics.It survived because it was a status symbol, a social currency, one of those ways we recognized each other.I suppose thats still why it survives why leftism survives, I couldn’t hang hang on the pre V2 jesuits instilled a commitment to reason transcended class.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Curle says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Look back on the NYT coverage of Michael Brown as "not an angel" and compare it to this. When someone is white, middle class, polite, they regard them as basically nice, even though, puzzlingly, they are a Nazi. When someone is black, poor, and a victim of police violence, they focus on the fact that they have been known to shoplift and to make rap songs that include vulgar language. If the NYT think long and hard about this discrepancy they will learn what they need to know about what is wrong with this coverage.

    Michael Brown cannot appropriately be categorized as anything other than a victim of his own poor behavior and decisions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Nobody wants to start a new society with the likes of Macklemore chick or that Maddow fellow, do they?

    That Maddow fellow?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    That Maddow fellow?

    I think that's the joke. Have you looked at a picture of Rachel Maddow?
    , @jorge videla (BGI volunteer)
    autism is sad!
    , @Anon

    That Maddow fellow?
     
    They have internet in your nursing home?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Eagle Eye says:
    @PiltdownMan

    We assigned Richard Fausset, one of our smartest thinkers and best writers
     
    Does this mean that he gets a raise? Or does it mean that he get eased out?

    Also, the adolescent part of my brain notes that the New York Times actually quoted the words "normal ass."

    We assigned Richard Fausset, one of our smartest thinkers and best writers

    NYT complimenting its own writer has an air of anticipatory defensiveness.

    Would the NYT call one of its “privileged” white male writer “one of our smartest thinkers and best writers”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    Does anyone know where this Fausset fellow ranks on the NYT-Krugman scale of 'smart thinkers and bestest writers'? His bio shows the classical bi-coastal employment pattern of the successful , Proggy writer, his previous work is all highly slanted, how can he be taking so much stick? Life is really confusing me these days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Hail says: • Website

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  43. Curle says:
    @Buffalo Joe
    The NYT and others keep beating the "They are Nazis" drum. I wonder what many teens and early 20 somethings know about Nazis other than the holocaust

    I remember the NYT telling us Nixon, Reagan, Lee Atwater, the Boy Scouts and those who might cut NPR funding were Nazis. Might I presume that this drummer proposes to cut NPR funding?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    Might I presume that this drummer proposes to cut NPR funding?

    No he founded what is clearly a neo nazi political party, the Traditionalist Worker Party. Maybe there's a bit of boy who cried wolf going on and you can partially blame the media but you mostly just sound unable or unwilling to see whats right in front of your eyes.


    https://www.tradworker.org

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Curle
    I remember the NYT telling us Nixon, Reagan, Lee Atwater, the Boy Scouts and those who might cut NPR funding were Nazis. Might I presume that this drummer proposes to cut NPR funding?

    Might I presume that this drummer proposes to cut NPR funding?

    No he founded what is clearly a neo nazi political party, the Traditionalist Worker Party. Maybe there’s a bit of boy who cried wolf going on and you can partially blame the media but you mostly just sound unable or unwilling to see whats right in front of your eyes.

    https://www.tradworker.org

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Curle says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    It is a ridiculous article. The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    There are any number of white nationalist who deserve the kind of sympathetic, thoughtful portrayal that this guy got but neo nazis don't.

    Regarding neo-Nazis, “ the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.”

    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?

    I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know if you mean Fermi or Fermat but why don't you look up the biography of Enrico Fermi and get back to me.

    The guy is a neo nazi. The article doesn't ever take him for task and get at why he likes national socialism and nazi germany so much. There is something inherently nasty, gorish, and ignorant about neo nazism given the realities of history and the article almost totally ignores those dimensions of his ideology.

    It's a genuinely bad article that actually deserves the condemnation it's getting.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Dr. X says:
    @syonredux

    Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people
     
    How eloquent. No wonder he won the National Magazine Award....

    and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …
     
    But don't worry....the final solution to the problem of White people in America is nearing completion....

    Fifty years after passage of the landmark law that rewrote U.S. immigration policy, nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States, pushing the country’s foreign-born share to a near record 14%. For the past half-century, these modern-era immigrants and their descendants have accounted for just over half the nation’s population growth and have reshaped its racial and ethnic composition.
     

    Looking ahead, new Pew Research Center U.S. population projections show that if current demographic trends continue, future immigrants and their descendants will be an even bigger source of population growth. Between 2015 and 2065, they are projected to account for 88% of the U.S. population increase, or 103 million people, as the nation grows to 441 million.

     


    As a result of its changed makeup and rapid growth, new immigration since 1965 has altered the nation’s racial and ethnic composition. In 1965, 84% of Americans were non-Hispanic whites. By 2015, that share had declined to 62%. Meanwhile, the Hispanic share of the U.S. population rose from 4% in 1965 to 18% in 2015.
     

    The Pew Research analysis shows that without any post-1965 immigration, the nation’s racial and ethnic composition would be very different today: 75% white, 14% black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.
     

    The country’s overall population will feel the impact of these shifts. Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055 and 46% by 2065.
     
    http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

    Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people…

    This is true, but the meaning that one takes from this statement, and the context, is what’s important.

    How is this a true statement? Well, from the founding of this nation until 1965 or so, “normal ass white people” pretty much universally believed the following:

    1. America is a white nation built by and for white people
    2. Homosexuals are mentally ill
    3. Transgenders are even more mentally ill
    4. The role of woman is to “stand by her man” and raise his children
    5. Homosexuals, transgenders, and women don’t belong in the military
    6. Communism is bad
    7. If a white man got his ass out of bed in the morning and put in an honest day’s work, he could not only support his family, but get ahead in life.

    Today, if you believe #1-6 you are seen literally as a “Nazi” (and #7 is no longer true). Today you are seen as a Nazi because the culture has become inverted 180 degrees; women, gays, blacks, illegals and transgenders are holy and pure, and the white man is a satanic demon.

    So whether or not the white man is an actual Nazi or not he might as well be one, because 1) the ruling caste is going to call him one anyway, and 2) the “Nazis” in Germany were a working class movement (which, admittedly, got out of hand due to the fanatical leadership) but in fact they pretty much agreed with “all of the above,” as did normal Americans for the first 180-190 years of our existence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JudgeSmails
    That would be "normal ass Americans", don'tcha know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. donut says:

    F**k you Steve put some bait on your hook .

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

    Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people
     
    How eloquent. No wonder he won the National Magazine Award....

    and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …
     
    But don't worry....the final solution to the problem of White people in America is nearing completion....

    Fifty years after passage of the landmark law that rewrote U.S. immigration policy, nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States, pushing the country’s foreign-born share to a near record 14%. For the past half-century, these modern-era immigrants and their descendants have accounted for just over half the nation’s population growth and have reshaped its racial and ethnic composition.
     

    Looking ahead, new Pew Research Center U.S. population projections show that if current demographic trends continue, future immigrants and their descendants will be an even bigger source of population growth. Between 2015 and 2065, they are projected to account for 88% of the U.S. population increase, or 103 million people, as the nation grows to 441 million.

     


    As a result of its changed makeup and rapid growth, new immigration since 1965 has altered the nation’s racial and ethnic composition. In 1965, 84% of Americans were non-Hispanic whites. By 2015, that share had declined to 62%. Meanwhile, the Hispanic share of the U.S. population rose from 4% in 1965 to 18% in 2015.
     

    The Pew Research analysis shows that without any post-1965 immigration, the nation’s racial and ethnic composition would be very different today: 75% white, 14% black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.
     

    The country’s overall population will feel the impact of these shifts. Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055 and 46% by 2065.
     
    http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

    But are they “normal-ass white people” or “normal ass-white people”? Hmm..

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    But are they “normal-ass white people” or “normal ass-white people”? Hmm..
     
    WOKE bestiary:

    "Normal-ass white people"= Nazis

    "Normal ass-white people"=Nazis

    Verdict: Distinction without a difference
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. JerryC says:
    @Jack D
    You have to learn to say yes. Agree and amplify. The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don't understand that - if Steve said this then most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won't permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing. You'll be damned if you agree with that MJ reporter about ANYTHING.

    The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don’t understand that – if Steve said this most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won’t permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing.

    Seems pretty clear to me the guy intended to imply that “normal ass white people” are by definition evil white supremacists. And have been since 1776 (only since 1776?). So no one should be surprised when one of them is outed as diabolical crypto-nazi.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dave Pinsen
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    There are two things going on here, and the NYT is either oblivious or playing dumb.

    The first is that the Mother Jones left thinks that anyone who voted for Trump is a "Nazi".

    The second is that this drummer, who voted for Trump, is a Nazi sympathizer, without the quotes.

    Now, obviously, the NYT could have found plenty of Trump supporters who would have told them the same things about Travon Martin, etc., without adding the bit about Hitler not being such a bad guy. A cynical explanation of why they profiled the Nazi sympathizer was that they wanted to tar the rest of the Trump right as Nazi sympathizers.

    If so, that seems to have backfired.

    The left's crazed reaction to the profile is, I suspect, not because they really fear Nazism is being normalized, but because they fear that a lot of readers will dismiss the Nazi stuff as harmless LARPing and get red pilled by the non-Nazi dissident right stuff.
    , @Bill

    Seems pretty clear to me the guy intended to imply that “normal ass white people” are by definition evil white supremacists.
     
    But what are you objecting to? Don't normal people wish to be ruled by their co-ethnics? Are you suggesting that wishing to be ruled by your co-ethnics is abnormal?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. donut says:

    What to make of this ? Steve and his fans are all Old Testament .

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    All the things that God would have us do are hard .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Bugg says:

    “Who were those people?” Can almost hear Jerry Seinfeld asking George Costanza this very question in Monk’s Diner on 96th Street.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. Hail says: • Website

    Jared Taylor has come out in defense of Tony Hovater, calling him a racial dissident.

    (Was Jared Taylor once blue-checkmarked? I recall him being so; he is now longer.)
    _____________________

    Mike Enoch writes:

    I’m thinking that Richard Fausset figured his angle was “Look, this guy is totally normal, but also a Nazi. See, anyone can be a Nazi so watch out for Nazis everywhere.” But he totally f***ed up from the perspective of his bosses. The blue checks are going insane over the piece. Which gives away that they will not stand for any journalism that is not purely agenda driven.

    In the course of writing, Richard Fausset probably grew to actually like Tony and on some level his conscience kicked in and he couldn’t just smear him. Huge mistake for his career. Look at the reactions of agenda setting Jews like Ezra Klein.

    Richard Fausset did it wrong. He was supposed to bring back a hit piece or some useful information, preferably both. He did neither. Instead he gave US a propaganda win.

    Funny thing is, I spoke to Tony and it turns out that he actually DOES have seasonal allergies and occasionally takes an antihistamine. And Richard Fausset totally failed to even mention this in his article. What the hell was he thinking?

    _____________________

    A certain Mr Greenblatt, who it seems this very year has risen from mere second-tier government-apparatus-hanger-on in some obscure ideological-enforcement department of USGov, to Chief Suppressor of Anti-Semitism for the United States (i.e., new Head of the ADL; this may as well be a government position), writes:

    It’s critical for the press, when covering professional hatemongers, to avoid treating the abnormal as normal or to humanize the inhumane. By that basic measure, I’d score this @NYTimes piece: #Nazis- 1, @Public- 0.

    Hey, at least he gave us that extra ‘e’ and didn’t settle for his (likely) insinct, ‘inhuman’!

    More importantly, shall we treat Greenblatt as ‘abnormal’? Is ethnic activism and likely allegiance to a foreign state ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    In the course of writing, Richard Fausset probably grew to actually like Tony and on some level his conscience kicked in and he couldn’t just smear him.
     
    He might be right. Over the past weekend, Enoch posted some audio to his site from a couple of journalists who were supposed to write pieces on him. He seems to be getting sort of friendly with one of them, because they keep calling each other after the story went to press, and the journalist keeps laughing at his jokes, and even admitting some things about the journalism business you wouldn't really expect him to admit.
    , @bored identity
    All this greenblatting & projecting led bored identity to the very nadir of talmudodgery:

    " You know who else used to vilify political opponents as being inhumane unt abnormal ? "
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Guy de Champlagne
    It is a ridiculous article. The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    There are any number of white nationalist who deserve the kind of sympathetic, thoughtful portrayal that this guy got but neo nazis don't.

    “Nazi” is and always has been an abuse word. It was invented as an abuse word. The Germans never called themselves Nazis. Can you imagine having a serious discussion about the Vietnam War while referring to Vietnamese as “Gooks”? The reason people such as the New York Times use the word Nazi is to demonize the person they are targeting with that label. And it works. Hence the liberal hysteria about the alt-right instead of serious analysis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    I don't know the exact history of the term nazi. It's been used with an intended positive connotation at least since George Lincoln Rockwell's American Nazi Party so I know you're wrong about post war usage. But it's not really relevant to anything I said one way or the other.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Jack D
    Hovater:

    "To this day, people still believe that Trayvon was murdered by a racist white man."
     
    This leads me to believe that when the NYT reporter called Zimmerman "the white man who shot the black teenager", he was paraphrasing Hovater and not trying to pin Trayvon's death on whitey.

    Here’s the full paragraph in the original NYT article:

    In 2012, Mr. Hovater was incensed by the media coverage of the Trayvon Martin shooting, believing the story had been distorted to make a villain of George Zimmerman, the white man who shot the black teenager. By that time, he and Ms. Hovater had been dating for a year or two. She was a small-town girl who had fallen away from the Catholic Church (“It was just really boring”), and once considered herself liberal.

    It’s stated matter-of-factly by article writer Fausset that Zimmerman is white, consistent with past NYT mischaracterization.

    You’re quoting a tradworker.org article by Hovater that isn’t cited in the NYT article, so there’s no reason to assume that Fausset is referring to Hovater’s thoughts on Zimmerman’s race, which aren’t even explicitly stated in his Tradworker article, either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Curle
    Regarding neo-Nazis, “ the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.”

    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?

    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?

    I have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t know if you mean Fermi or Fermat but why don’t you look up the biography of Enrico Fermi and get back to me.

    The guy is a neo nazi. The article doesn’t ever take him for task and get at why he likes national socialism and nazi germany so much. There is something inherently nasty, gorish, and ignorant about neo nazism given the realities of history and the article almost totally ignores those dimensions of his ideology.

    It’s a genuinely bad article that actually deserves the condemnation it’s getting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    He strains at nazi gnats, but has already swallowed the commie camel. Yummy!
    , @Curle
    "The article doesn’t ever take him for task and get at why he likes national socialism and nazi germany so much."

    Because that's the job of a reporter, to selectively take people to task for their opinions? Want to provide an example where Bolshevik sympathizers are taken to task for associating with a group that starved up to 7 million Ukrainians as a cheap way of murdering them? When's the last time you took one of those hammer and sickle or Che Guavara tee-shirt wearing people to task? Perhaps that should be part of upcoming reporting on the Antifa?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    Her own mother said she died of a heart attack. Video of the incident shows she wasn’t hit by the car.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Causes of death are determined by coroners, not by grieving relatives. And for very good reasons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Forbes says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Look back on the NYT coverage of Michael Brown as "not an angel" and compare it to this. When someone is white, middle class, polite, they regard them as basically nice, even though, puzzlingly, they are a Nazi. When someone is black, poor, and a victim of police violence, they focus on the fact that they have been known to shoplift and to make rap songs that include vulgar language. If the NYT think long and hard about this discrepancy they will learn what they need to know about what is wrong with this coverage.

    Must be a Tiny Dick impostor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    Anything coherent from this troll is a cut and paste.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Hail says: • Website
    @Abe
    I read his article and this Hovater guy is a pretty fair writer! ("SJW's slimy tentacles", etc.) What are the chances he is or was a denizen of iSteve? I kind of like this Fausset guy too. Seems like a pretty standard-issue punk rock/post-hard core (or whatever it's called) Bernie Bro based on his allusions to The Minutemen and "the kind of man who starts a fire". Wants to understand, rather than reflexively denounce. Naively thinks our system of government should be about issues and not personalities, decided by a fair trial of ideas instead of whichever wannabe-mean girl and her cackling cabal of hens and simpering nancyboys is most adept at twisting the theatrics of democracy to its ends.

    Hovater interestingly calls himself a career social media villain. What are the chances he will pivot to completely embarrass his foes? People most triggered by this NYT profile are basically calling for his blood on account of the imminent Nazi threat Hovater represents. What if part of his plan to expose SJW's bloodthirsty hypocrisy is transitioning to some much more innocuous political identity as part of his ongoing political education?

    I kind of like this Fausset guy too. Seems like a pretty standard-issue punk rock/post-hard core (or whatever it’s called) Bernie Bro based on his allusions to The Minutemen and “the kind of man who starts a fire”. Wants to understand, rather than reflexively denounce.

    Questions Worth Asking:

    (1) Is Richard Fausset’s career over?

    (2) If so, will he salvage his career by announcing a dramatic discovery of Jewish ancestry, miracle Holocaust Survival (making Fausset a bonafide Third-Generation Holocaust Survivor), and perform a formal conversion to Judaism?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Option 3: Faussett becomes /Our guy/.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Thomas says:

    Ultimately, the New York Times’ and Richard Fausset’s cardinal sin was to presume that anyone could ever understand Mr. Hovater, or anyone like him, or that there might be reasons why people like him exist. That’s truly unacceptable. I’ve heard numerous Hannah Arendt (Eichmann trial, “banality of evil”) references this weekend over this piece, in claims that it’s nothing new. Ultimately, we’re not meant to seek any deeper meaning for any of this. “White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776.” And we must never, ever, ever think for a moment that people like Mr. Hovater have reasons for thinking the way that they do, much less potentially legitimate grievances. No, it’s evil, and banal, and just too much to think about, so why are you talking about it still?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hail

    “White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776.”
     
    This cringeworthy line is from an ethnomasochist called Shane Bauer, whom I briefly profile here (comment 71):

    Facts about Shane Bauer
    - (Born circa 1980) Grew up in 1980s and 1990s in a 0%-Black, 0%-Hispanic (by rounding) town in Minnesota.

    - Signs point to his being extremely racially naive.

    - Married to an ideologically-angry, humorless, far-left SJW type around four years his senior and now in her 40s (to her credit, of sorts, she was doing the SJW thing way back in her 20s, before it was cool, or before its current iteration became cool).

    - Bauer was one of those arrested by Iranian authorities on charges of illegal entry and espionage in 2009. Has milked this ever since. Get on the Ethnomasochism Gravy Train.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Hail
    Jared Taylor has come out in defense of Tony Hovater, calling him a racial dissident.

    (Was Jared Taylor once blue-checkmarked? I recall him being so; he is now longer.)
    _____________________

    Mike Enoch writes:

    I'm thinking that Richard Fausset figured his angle was "Look, this guy is totally normal, but also a Nazi. See, anyone can be a Nazi so watch out for Nazis everywhere." But he totally f***ed up from the perspective of his bosses. The blue checks are going insane over the piece. Which gives away that they will not stand for any journalism that is not purely agenda driven.

    In the course of writing, Richard Fausset probably grew to actually like Tony and on some level his conscience kicked in and he couldn't just smear him. Huge mistake for his career. Look at the reactions of agenda setting Jews like Ezra Klein.

    Richard Fausset did it wrong. He was supposed to bring back a hit piece or some useful information, preferably both. He did neither. Instead he gave US a propaganda win.

    Funny thing is, I spoke to Tony and it turns out that he actually DOES have seasonal allergies and occasionally takes an antihistamine. And Richard Fausset totally failed to even mention this in his article. What the hell was he thinking?
     
    _____________________

    A certain Mr Greenblatt, who it seems this very year has risen from mere second-tier government-apparatus-hanger-on in some obscure ideological-enforcement department of USGov, to Chief Suppressor of Anti-Semitism for the United States (i.e., new Head of the ADL; this may as well be a government position), writes:

    It's critical for the press, when covering professional hatemongers, to avoid treating the abnormal as normal or to humanize the inhumane. By that basic measure, I'd score this @NYTimes piece: #Nazis- 1, @Public- 0.
     
    Hey, at least he gave us that extra 'e' and didn't settle for his (likely) insinct, 'inhuman'!

    More importantly, shall we treat Greenblatt as 'abnormal'? Is ethnic activism and likely allegiance to a foreign state 'normal' or 'abnormal'?

    In the course of writing, Richard Fausset probably grew to actually like Tony and on some level his conscience kicked in and he couldn’t just smear him.

    He might be right. Over the past weekend, Enoch posted some audio to his site from a couple of journalists who were supposed to write pieces on him. He seems to be getting sort of friendly with one of them, because they keep calling each other after the story went to press, and the journalist keeps laughing at his jokes, and even admitting some things about the journalism business you wouldn’t really expect him to admit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Opinionator
    Nobody wants to start a new society with the likes of Macklemore chick or that Maddow fellow, do they?

    That Maddow fellow?

    That Maddow fellow?

    I think that’s the joke. Have you looked at a picture of Rachel Maddow?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Guy de Champlagne
    It is a ridiculous article. The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    There are any number of white nationalist who deserve the kind of sympathetic, thoughtful portrayal that this guy got but neo nazis don't.

    The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    I suppose that’s one way of looking at things. On the other hand, every time the NYT advocates for some war in the Middle East, they gloss over the nastiness and gore inherent in what that means too. So they have some practice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    Yeah and that's a perfectly reasonable criticism to make of the times. Although at least with wars theres some amount of violence assumed by any reasonable reader while in the US domestic politics is assumed to be free of large scale political violence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Off topic: We all know there are good whites and bad whites. But did you know there are good good whites and bad good whites? Something called Malaka Gharib explains.

    https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/11/26/565694874/volunteering-abroad-read-this-before-you-post-that-selfie?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2054

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. @Daniel H
    Clearest expression yet why the NY Times is doomed as a business and will only exist as a charity in the future. They have forgotten (or maybe, for decades, haven't even known) what business they are in. They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion. The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, "Pinch" Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers. Everything else is beside the point. A circle-jerk of virtue signaling white SJW readers is not valuable enough for your paying customers to continue to do so.

    The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, “Pinch” Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers.

    Not anymore. The Times now makes more money from subscribers than from advertisers.

    Twenty years ago, advertising revenue made up 63 percent of the paper’s revenues, while subscription revenue accounted for 27 percent. As of Q1, those numbers are nearly inverted: Subscriptions account for 61 percent and advertising represents 33 percent of the top line.

    How the New York Times saved itself
    Subscriptions, not ads.
    BY PETER KAFKA AND RANI MOLLA MAY 4, 2017, 5:22PM EDT

    https://www.recode.net/2017/5/4/15550052/new-york-times-subscription-advertising-revenue-chart

    More about how the NYT is increasingly focusing on subscribers, not advertisers:

    https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/fn_nyt_chart.svg

    https://www.wired.com/2017/02/new-york-times-digital-journalism/

    Smart tech analysts like Ben Thompson have explained why general news services have become pretty useless to advertisers.

    https://stratechery.com/2015/popping-the-publishing-bubble/

    So if you think the NYT has become ever more of a niche SJW mouthpiece and ever less a neutral news source, well, there’s a sound business reason for that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    >>As of Q1, those numbers are nearly inverted: Subscriptions account for 61 percent and advertising represents 33 percent of the top line.

    Good point, but this statistic can be misleading. If 20 years ago - let's pick a round number - the top line was $500 million, then advertising accounted for $300 million and subscription accounted for $150 million +/-. But today overall top line revenue is down. And it is down mainly because 1) advertisers are advertising less on print and digital media, and 2) what they do spend on advertising os much lower per inch of page space than what they spent 20 years ago. So - let's pick another round number - lets say that top line revenue is $200 million today, then $60 million is coming from advertisers and $120 million is coming from subscribers. So they are making significantly less money overall and even the absolute revenue coming in from subscribers - despite being a greater portion of total revenue - is still less than it was 2o years ago. Now, my point uses numbers that I pulled out of my head, but I wouldn't be surprised if my argument is telling the true story. As we go forward, this much is certain, top line revenue will continue to fall and no amount of subscriber revenue will be sufficient to keep the paper afloat in its current condition. The NY Times future is of the likes of VOX, Slate or UNZ.
    , @Stan Adams
    For years and years and years, my ritual has been to buy the Thanksgiving edition of the Miami Herald - the thickest paper of the year - and go through all the Black Friday ads. It's a tribute to the Great American Orgy of Naked Consumerism.

    On Thursday, I tried to buy a copy of the English Herald, with absolutely no success. I couldn't find a single copy for sale at any of the places where I looked - two CVSes, two Walgreenses, three gas stations, two convenience stores. Publix (a ubiquitous supermarket chain) would have had it, but all of the company's innumerable locations were closed for the holiday. (As they should have been.)

    While driving around, I spotted a number of Herald vending machines, almost all of which were empty. (One or two of them had ruined papers from weeks ago in their display windows.) Finally, I located a vending machine that, miraculously, had a copy of the Thursday paper in the display window.

    The daily paper now costs $2*, but this edition had the weekend price of $3. (That fact was not mentioned on the price tag on the vending machine. I only noticed it when I looked through the window to verify the date of the edition.) Somehow I managed to scrounge together 12 quarters. It was only then that I discovered that the vending machine, rusted with age, was hopelessly jammed. (At least I got my money back. I had to press the Coin Return button several times, though.) So I was totally out of luck.

    I did pick up the Spanish edition of the paper for $2. It was pretty thick in its own right. A good number of the ads were bilingual, but still.

    I used to eat all the time at a restaurant at a hotel that always had big tall stacks of the Herald at the front desk, free for the taking. (This included the full Sunday paper, complete with all of the extras - the ads, the comics, the weekly TV guide, etc.) The manager told me that the hotel didn't even request them - they were dumped off as a matter of course, to boost circulation. There were always far more copies delivered than there were rooms at the hotel - and this was a decent-sized establishment.

    For years and years and years, I never felt the need to subscribe to the paper - any paper - because free copies were lying around all over the place. Even today, the better hotels have big stacks of unread Wall Street Journals and USA Todays in the lobby.

    Not so many years ago, there were cities where entire neighborhoods got free delivery of the paper seven days a week, courtesy of one local business or another.

    The circulation figures were absolute bullshit for many years. Advertisers got royally ripped off for at least a decade.

    *Ten years ago, the daily Herald cost 35 cents in Dade, and only a quarter in Broward. As late as 2005, the Broward edition of the Sunday paper cost only 50 cents.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese.

    You are more than likely thinking of a woman who isn’t Heather Heyer. Most people think Heather Heyer was the woman they saw draped over the hood of the car in an overhead shot. That woman suffered broken legs, but survived. Heather Heyer isn’t shown in any of the most common photos of the scene.

    The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    The issue with that is that she doesn’t seem to have been directly hit by his car. His car hit another car, which hit her.

    Whereas, you can also see people being directly hit by his car, at full speed, that are just tossed aside.

    So while I disagree with the idea that she died of a heart attack, her obesity almost certainly had something to do with it.

    I think the uncertainty comes from her mother stating that she died of a heart attack on TV. What I’m guessing happened is that a doctor told the family that she died instantly of “heart failure”, which her mother confused with a heart attack, which is technically called “myocardial infarction”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. If they are promptly defibrillated, you might be able to get it going again (or maybe not) .

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone's death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril - maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.
    , @Opinionator
    Whereas, you can also see people being directly hit by his car, at full speed, that are just tossed aside.

    Hardly "at full speed." Casualties would have been a lot worse.

    One of the photos even shows the break lights on prior to impact.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Hail says: • Website
    @Thomas
    Ultimately, the New York Times' and Richard Fausset's cardinal sin was to presume that anyone could ever understand Mr. Hovater, or anyone like him, or that there might be reasons why people like him exist. That's truly unacceptable. I've heard numerous Hannah Arendt (Eichmann trial, "banality of evil") references this weekend over this piece, in claims that it's nothing new. Ultimately, we're not meant to seek any deeper meaning for any of this. "White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776." And we must never, ever, ever think for a moment that people like Mr. Hovater have reasons for thinking the way that they do, much less potentially legitimate grievances. No, it's evil, and banal, and just too much to think about, so why are you talking about it still?

    “White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776.”

    This cringeworthy line is from an ethnomasochist called Shane Bauer, whom I briefly profile here (comment 71):

    Facts about Shane Bauer
    - (Born circa 1980) Grew up in 1980s and 1990s in a 0%-Black, 0%-Hispanic (by rounding) town in Minnesota.

    - Signs point to his being extremely racially naive.

    - Married to an ideologically-angry, humorless, far-left SJW type around four years his senior and now in her 40s (to her credit, of sorts, she was doing the SJW thing way back in her 20s, before it was cool, or before its current iteration became cool).

    - Bauer was one of those arrested by Iranian authorities on charges of illegal entry and espionage in 2009. Has milked this ever since. Get on the Ethnomasochism Gravy Train.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Facts about Shane Bauer
    - (Born circa 1980) Grew up in 1980s and 1990s in a 0%-Black, 0%-Hispanic (by rounding) town in Minnesota.

    - Signs point to his being extremely racially naive.
     
    Growing up in California (the canary in the Anglo-American coal-mine) has its advantages....
    , @Thomas
    I've met Bauer personally. He majored in Development Studies at UC Berkeley, and is still based out of Berkeley professionally. (Funny enough, that particular major has seen more than one alum that I know of wind up in similar trouble overseas). Pretty much came across to me as standard-issue crunchy white hippy, gauged ears and everything, and I wouldn't disagree with your characterization. I don't think one lands in for months in an Iranian jail without being rather naive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Reg Cæsar
    Early sixty-somethings can remember when "holocaust" was prefaced with "nuclear".
    Read More
    • Replies: @slumber_j
    I would guess that "Holocaust" in the sense of the wholesale murder of Jews by the Nazis only really got going with the 1978 TV miniseries of that name. I certainly hadn't heard the expression used that way before then.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. syonredux says:
    @Hail

    “White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776.”
     
    This cringeworthy line is from an ethnomasochist called Shane Bauer, whom I briefly profile here (comment 71):

    Facts about Shane Bauer
    - (Born circa 1980) Grew up in 1980s and 1990s in a 0%-Black, 0%-Hispanic (by rounding) town in Minnesota.

    - Signs point to his being extremely racially naive.

    - Married to an ideologically-angry, humorless, far-left SJW type around four years his senior and now in her 40s (to her credit, of sorts, she was doing the SJW thing way back in her 20s, before it was cool, or before its current iteration became cool).

    - Bauer was one of those arrested by Iranian authorities on charges of illegal entry and espionage in 2009. Has milked this ever since. Get on the Ethnomasochism Gravy Train.

    Facts about Shane Bauer
    - (Born circa 1980) Grew up in 1980s and 1990s in a 0%-Black, 0%-Hispanic (by rounding) town in Minnesota.

    - Signs point to his being extremely racially naive.

    Growing up in California (the canary in the Anglo-American coal-mine) has its advantages….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Jack D says:
    @Emblematic
    Her own mother said she died of a heart attack. Video of the incident shows she wasn't hit by the car.

    Causes of death are determined by coroners, not by grieving relatives. And for very good reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the "cause" of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a "but for" sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of "ultimate" cause?

    How much societal pressure was there pointing this coroner in the direction of a "blunt force trauma" conclusion?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Abe says: • Website
    @syonredux
    I was more interested in calling attention to his pleb-tier prose style (really, "normal ass?") and to the fact that demographic change ensures that White Anglos will, in the near future, be a relic population.....

    I was more interested in calling attention to his pleb-tier prose style (really, “normal ass?”)

    No, you were right. Whatever ambiguity there existed in that quote is collapsed by the use of the WOKE-ifying intensifier ‘-ass’. It basically means: ‘here I am, a privileged white person, slightly humiliating myself by trying to talk like an authentic black person. But I’m willing to suffer such minor indignities to signal unequivocally my white ally-hood to people of color and their sacred causes.”

    The rest of it is an unequivocal condemnation of the US and its history. “America has been white supremacist and therefore proto-Nazi since its very founding, and therefore condemning the most egregious racists such as this Hovater fellow is a waste of time. There is no ‘good’ America that can be preserved by fighting the minority of ‘bad’ whites out there. The whole thing is structurally rotten and must be fundamentally altered by us, the enlightened vanguard, till historical America is replaced by Bizarro America, where the national story begins not with the Founding Fathers, but their slaves. Where one’s claim to Americanness is inversely proportional to one’s time in America, and where the real father of his country is not George Washington but President Hussein Bizarro. Amen”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Danindc
    Ha. Exactly. Well said Abe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @syonredux

    Some readers did see value in the piece. Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people
     
    How eloquent. No wonder he won the National Magazine Award....

    and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.” …
     
    But don't worry....the final solution to the problem of White people in America is nearing completion....

    Fifty years after passage of the landmark law that rewrote U.S. immigration policy, nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the United States, pushing the country’s foreign-born share to a near record 14%. For the past half-century, these modern-era immigrants and their descendants have accounted for just over half the nation’s population growth and have reshaped its racial and ethnic composition.
     

    Looking ahead, new Pew Research Center U.S. population projections show that if current demographic trends continue, future immigrants and their descendants will be an even bigger source of population growth. Between 2015 and 2065, they are projected to account for 88% of the U.S. population increase, or 103 million people, as the nation grows to 441 million.

     


    As a result of its changed makeup and rapid growth, new immigration since 1965 has altered the nation’s racial and ethnic composition. In 1965, 84% of Americans were non-Hispanic whites. By 2015, that share had declined to 62%. Meanwhile, the Hispanic share of the U.S. population rose from 4% in 1965 to 18% in 2015.
     

    The Pew Research analysis shows that without any post-1965 immigration, the nation’s racial and ethnic composition would be very different today: 75% white, 14% black, 8% Hispanic and less than 1% Asian.
     

    The country’s overall population will feel the impact of these shifts. Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055 and 46% by 2065.
     
    http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million-to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/

    Die Endlösung der Weißefrage

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Clyde
    This third one (in a series?) is called extending the click bait. This article has 782 comments so you can see it has Times readers in a self righteous tizzy. Imagine you are a NY Times reader relaxing on a nice sunny Sunday, when Tony Hovater comes along to trigger you.

    >extending the click bait.

    Nailed it. But I also think there is something in the ego of the NYT staff that they can’t stand being called out by their own fans. They’re condescending douchebags even to the people who agree with them and love them, like shut up peasants we’re the professionals here and how dare you judge us on how we Do Our Jobs?

    >article has 782 comments

    Thanksgiving is a bad time to be a SJW type, they’re looking for distractions lol

    Read More
    • Agree: el topo
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Guy de Champlagne
    It is a ridiculous article. The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    There are any number of white nationalist who deserve the kind of sympathetic, thoughtful portrayal that this guy got but neo nazis don't.

    You forgot “vile” in your litany of SJW warding words.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Tim
    When you expose "extremist views" that are totally reasonable, and everybody secretly agrees with, you have to ask yourself, who's the extremist here?

    There is always a risk that someone with opposing views can come across quite sympathetic. That is why the media choose to keep the likes of David Duke in the spotlight. He will garner no sympathy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    This happened in the run up to the Iraq war, too—no mainstream media outlet was going to give a coherent and normal looking opponent of the war a platform, but they’d show hostile foreigners or aging hippies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Opinionator
    Nobody wants to start a new society with the likes of Macklemore chick or that Maddow fellow, do they?

    That Maddow fellow?

    autism is sad!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @Forbes
    I don't remember nuclear holocaust until (long) after the description of the WW II concentration camp explanation was condensed to the one-word "holocaust." And that was long after my formal schooling ended.

    Nuclear holocaust seems remnant of Reagan era media hysteria.

    Nuclear holocaust seems remnant of Reagan era media hysteria.

    The Ngram thingy that Jorge links to below shows that “nuclear holocaust” peaked about 1983, while generic “holocaust” did so in 2000.

    But I spent the Nixon years in a college town (as a townie kid), so I’d have heard it sooner and more often.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Buffalo Joe
    The NYT and others keep beating the "They are Nazis" drum. I wonder what many teens and early 20 somethings know about Nazis other than the holocaust

    like the great success the party’s economic policies were?
    like its leaders’ extreme pro animal rights position?
    like the wansee conference occurred 1 month after the US declared war, and germany knew it was going to lose?
    like the allies declared war before germany had conquered any territory it hadn’t been deprived of by versailles?
    etc. etc. etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. gcochran says:
    @newrouter
    "The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest. "

    Also known as a heart attack. The coroner was just filling in the Narrative story line.

    A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing: only an idiot or liar would equate them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @newrouter
    How would you lie officially to preserve the Narrative?
    , @newrouter
    "A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing"

    Please do elaborate on what "blunt force trauma to the chest" means? Also where was the body found?
    , @Jack Hanson
    You should probably learn about commotio cortis and what the vulnerable period is before calling anyone an idiot, just saying.
    , @Opinionator
    Can they exist concurrently? Can one lead to the other? Is a particular cause of death autopsy conclusion always certain, or can the evidence sometimes lend itself to several plausible competing explanations?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @anon
    The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    I suppose that's one way of looking at things. On the other hand, every time the NYT advocates for some war in the Middle East, they gloss over the nastiness and gore inherent in what that means too. So they have some practice.

    Yeah and that’s a perfectly reasonable criticism to make of the times. Although at least with wars theres some amount of violence assumed by any reasonable reader while in the US domestic politics is assumed to be free of large scale political violence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles

    while in the US domestic politics is assumed to be free of large scale political violence.

     

    The peace loving Antifa and BLM movements fully agree.

    https://i.imgur.com/r9HvFqC.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. “White supremacists are normal ass white people…”

    I guess it’s better to be normal ass white people than creepy ass crackers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    In both uses, the "ass" is intended to add a derogatory accent to the adjective.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Emblematic
    "Nazi" is and always has been an abuse word. It was invented as an abuse word. The Germans never called themselves Nazis. Can you imagine having a serious discussion about the Vietnam War while referring to Vietnamese as "Gooks"? The reason people such as the New York Times use the word Nazi is to demonize the person they are targeting with that label. And it works. Hence the liberal hysteria about the alt-right instead of serious analysis.

    I don’t know the exact history of the term nazi. It’s been used with an intended positive connotation at least since George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party so I know you’re wrong about post war usage. But it’s not really relevant to anything I said one way or the other.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    It’s been used with an intended positive connotation at least since George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party so I know you’re wrong about post war usage.

    George Lincoln Rockwell was kind of a troll too, though. He had a tendency of saying outrageous things for attention. Do an image search for "The Man Who Wants To Be Hitler" to get a very basic idea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. newrouter says:

    Politically useful terminology in a political report after the fact. No?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. asdf says:

    The writers at the Times can’t do their job and they need to quit and be replaced by hard working immigrants.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. @Tim
    When you expose "extremist views" that are totally reasonable, and everybody secretly agrees with, you have to ask yourself, who's the extremist here?

    Would you consider all of these ideas “reasonable”? https://www.tradworker.org/points/

    Is there any doubt the author could have totally crucified this guy in the eyes of the readers by focusing on the right components of his ideology.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    Yes, they are reasonable. They might not be right, and I certainly don't agree with all of them, but they are reasonable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Thomas says:
    @Hail

    “White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776.”
     
    This cringeworthy line is from an ethnomasochist called Shane Bauer, whom I briefly profile here (comment 71):

    Facts about Shane Bauer
    - (Born circa 1980) Grew up in 1980s and 1990s in a 0%-Black, 0%-Hispanic (by rounding) town in Minnesota.

    - Signs point to his being extremely racially naive.

    - Married to an ideologically-angry, humorless, far-left SJW type around four years his senior and now in her 40s (to her credit, of sorts, she was doing the SJW thing way back in her 20s, before it was cool, or before its current iteration became cool).

    - Bauer was one of those arrested by Iranian authorities on charges of illegal entry and espionage in 2009. Has milked this ever since. Get on the Ethnomasochism Gravy Train.

    I’ve met Bauer personally. He majored in Development Studies at UC Berkeley, and is still based out of Berkeley professionally. (Funny enough, that particular major has seen more than one alum that I know of wind up in similar trouble overseas). Pretty much came across to me as standard-issue crunchy white hippy, gauged ears and everything, and I wouldn’t disagree with your characterization. I don’t think one lands in for months in an Iranian jail without being rather naive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    Working for the CIA?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Jack D says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    Was she fat though? Every picture in mainstream sources makes her look skinny but every altright source shows fat pictures of her. I honestly can't tell if the pictures of the morbidly obese woman are of the same woman or not.

    Like many women, Heather appears to have changed her weight (and hair color) over time (and not for the better) but even in her “fat” pictures she is plump but not morbidly obese.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    even in her “fat” pictures she is plump but not morbidly obese.

    I think you're using a definition of "pleasantly plump" that is very different from the one everyone else uses. When I think of "pleasantly plump", I think of the wife on some sitcom or something. Heather Heyer was obviously far more than 30 pounds overweight, and it wouldn't surprise me a bit if she was more than 100 pounds over her ideal weight, which would make her "morbidly obese" by definition.

    I don't know why you would do this, although I would suspect dishonesty has something to do with it.
    , @James Kabala
    The article by "Marcus Cicero" [sic - our writer apparently did not realize that Tullius is not equivalent to a modern-day American middle name] that was posted here included pictures of a genuinely fat woman who does not look like very much like Heyer. Cicero seemed to recognize that it was a different woman but filled his piece with obfuscating prose designed to conceal that fact.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. newrouter says:
    @gcochran
    A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing: only an idiot or liar would equate them.

    How would you lie officially to preserve the Narrative?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. newrouter says:
    @gcochran
    A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing: only an idiot or liar would equate them.

    “A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing”

    Please do elaborate on what “blunt force trauma to the chest” means? Also where was the body found?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Guy de Champlagne
    I don't know the exact history of the term nazi. It's been used with an intended positive connotation at least since George Lincoln Rockwell's American Nazi Party so I know you're wrong about post war usage. But it's not really relevant to anything I said one way or the other.

    It’s been used with an intended positive connotation at least since George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party so I know you’re wrong about post war usage.

    George Lincoln Rockwell was kind of a troll too, though. He had a tendency of saying outrageous things for attention. Do an image search for “The Man Who Wants To Be Hitler” to get a very basic idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. donut says:
    @donut
    What to make of this ? Steve and his fans are all Old Testament .

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb-g4O2QDZg

    All the things that God would have us do are hard .

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

    I kind of like this Fausset guy too. Seems like a pretty standard-issue punk rock/post-hard core (or whatever it’s called) Bernie Bro based on his allusions to The Minutemen and “the kind of man who starts a fire”. Wants to understand, rather than reflexively denounce.
     
    Questions Worth Asking:

    (1) Is Richard Fausset's career over?

    (2) If so, will he salvage his career by announcing a dramatic discovery of Jewish ancestry, miracle Holocaust Survival (making Fausset a bonafide Third-Generation Holocaust Survivor), and perform a formal conversion to Judaism?

    Option 3: Faussett becomes /Our guy/.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @gcochran
    A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing: only an idiot or liar would equate them.

    You should probably learn about commotio cortis and what the vulnerable period is before calling anyone an idiot, just saying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Jack D says:
    @anon
    She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese.

    You are more than likely thinking of a woman who isn't Heather Heyer. Most people think Heather Heyer was the woman they saw draped over the hood of the car in an overhead shot. That woman suffered broken legs, but survived. Heather Heyer isn't shown in any of the most common photos of the scene.

    The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.


    The issue with that is that she doesn't seem to have been directly hit by his car. His car hit another car, which hit her.

    Whereas, you can also see people being directly hit by his car, at full speed, that are just tossed aside.

    So while I disagree with the idea that she died of a heart attack, her obesity almost certainly had something to do with it.

    I think the uncertainty comes from her mother stating that she died of a heart attack on TV. What I'm guessing happened is that a doctor told the family that she died instantly of "heart failure", which her mother confused with a heart attack, which is technically called "myocardial infarction".

    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. If they are promptly defibrillated, you might be able to get it going again (or maybe not) .

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril – maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Getting someone back from commotio cortis via defibrillation is easy, relatively speaking. The danger is when people are standing around the Little League short stop for ten minutes trying to figure out how a ball hitting Jimmy in the chest knocked him out. At that point you're bringing back a vegetable.
    , @anon
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart.

    I am aware of that. But I'm also aware of the fact that being obese and a smoker weakens your heart, and makes it a lot easier for that to happen.

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow.

    Obviously. I was just pointing out that her obesity was a contributing factor.

    Of course, her decision to stand in the street and block traffic in the middle of a riot was an even bigger contributing factor, so it's kind of academic anyway.

    Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

    I don't know. It was considered kind of cool by a lot of people for a long time. Protesters have been blocking traffic for years, and people have been driving their cars into them for years. You used to see Black Lives Matter blocking traffic, and you'd always hear comments from people talking about what they'd do if they were in that situation. It wasn't until the middle of this August that people decided it was "terrorism".

    You can go on YouTube and find dozens of videos of people driving cars into protesters blocking the street. In each and every one of them that was posted prior to this summer, the comments were overwhelmingly on the side of the drivers. The mildest ones are along the lines of "Well, if you don't want to get hit by a car, don't stand in the middle of the street.".

    So while I certainly don't endorse it, it was considered "cool" for a long time.

    maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.

    , @Opinionator
    Or maybe you were trying to escape a violent mob.
    , @Pericles

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

     

    So if you're part of a mob attacking a car which then -- perhaps to escape or in confusion -- drives into a crowd, you're responsible?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. anonguy says:
    @Forbes
    Alternative NYT: We denounced Mr. Hovater as reprehensible using all the ugly names we could muster and readers still thought we "normalized" him. Having already taken outrage to 11, we couldn't find 12 on the scale. Groveling apology to follow...

    Alternative NYT: We denounced Mr. Hovater as reprehensible using all the ugly names we could muster and readers still thought we “normalized” him.

    Honestly, this is what happens to the guys whenever they try to publish anything near “balanced”, they get decried as heretics, insufficiently pious, et, so you can hardly blame them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. newrouter says:

    “If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. ”

    So the driver did a “three bank shot” on fatso Heather. Good Allan you are amusing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Fields won't be amused when they sentence him to life imprisonment for exactly this reason.
    , @EriK
    See: The Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL7nLSSSWjw
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @Jack D
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. If they are promptly defibrillated, you might be able to get it going again (or maybe not) .

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone's death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril - maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Getting someone back from commotio cortis via defibrillation is easy, relatively speaking. The danger is when people are standing around the Little League short stop for ten minutes trying to figure out how a ball hitting Jimmy in the chest knocked him out. At that point you’re bringing back a vegetable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Vegetable Jimmy Memorial Ball Field
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. I thought normalizing abhorrent behavior was the whole point of the NYT and its editor in chief.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. If they are promptly defibrillated, you might be able to get it going again (or maybe not) .

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone's death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril - maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart.

    I am aware of that. But I’m also aware of the fact that being obese and a smoker weakens your heart, and makes it a lot easier for that to happen.

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow.

    Obviously. I was just pointing out that her obesity was a contributing factor.

    Of course, her decision to stand in the street and block traffic in the middle of a riot was an even bigger contributing factor, so it’s kind of academic anyway.

    Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

    I don’t know. It was considered kind of cool by a lot of people for a long time. Protesters have been blocking traffic for years, and people have been driving their cars into them for years. You used to see Black Lives Matter blocking traffic, and you’d always hear comments from people talking about what they’d do if they were in that situation. It wasn’t until the middle of this August that people decided it was “terrorism”.

    You can go on YouTube and find dozens of videos of people driving cars into protesters blocking the street. In each and every one of them that was posted prior to this summer, the comments were overwhelmingly on the side of the drivers. The mildest ones are along the lines of “Well, if you don’t want to get hit by a car, don’t stand in the middle of the street.”.

    So while I certainly don’t endorse it, it was considered “cool” for a long time.

    maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If someone crashes a car into another car which hits me and I have a heart attack and die, I want my estate to sue.
    , @Thomas

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.
     
    In that case, you're talking about a defense of necessity (which generally isn't recognized in homicide cases most of the time), not causation.

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened "but for" the defendant's action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable. And, generally, in both tort and criminal law, there is what they call the "eggshell skull" rule, that a defendant "takes the victim as they find them," meaning that even if there is some pre-existing physical or medical vulnerability on the part of the victim, the defendant will still be held responsible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Off topic: they finally found Haven Monahan. It appears that there was a rape on campus, or at least one that had enough evidence to merit a real trial

    https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2017/11/16/yale-grad-to-be-tried-for-sexual-assault/

    8 page Rolling Stone thinkpiece to follow, and a NYT article above the fold, right? right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. Danindc says:
    @Abe

    I was more interested in calling attention to his pleb-tier prose style (really, “normal ass?”)
     
    No, you were right. Whatever ambiguity there existed in that quote is collapsed by the use of the WOKE-ifying intensifier '-ass'. It basically means: 'here I am, a privileged white person, slightly humiliating myself by trying to talk like an authentic black person. But I'm willing to suffer such minor indignities to signal unequivocally my white ally-hood to people of color and their sacred causes."

    The rest of it is an unequivocal condemnation of the US and its history. "America has been white supremacist and therefore proto-Nazi since its very founding, and therefore condemning the most egregious racists such as this Hovater fellow is a waste of time. There is no 'good' America that can be preserved by fighting the minority of 'bad' whites out there. The whole thing is structurally rotten and must be fundamentally altered by us, the enlightened vanguard, till historical America is replaced by Bizarro America, where the national story begins not with the Founding Fathers, but their slaves. Where one's claim to Americanness is inversely proportional to one's time in America, and where the real father of his country is not George Washington but President Hussein Bizarro. Amen"

    Ha. Exactly. Well said Abe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @Jack D
    Causes of death are determined by coroners, not by grieving relatives. And for very good reasons.

    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the “cause” of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a “but for” sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of “ultimate” cause?

    How much societal pressure was there pointing this coroner in the direction of a “blunt force trauma” conclusion?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the “cause” of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a “but for” sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of “ultimate” cause?
     
    "But for" is sufficient to convict someone, absent some sort of bizarre or unforeseeable intervening cause.

    In cases in which a coroner's finding can be disputed, a defendant might try to introduce their own expert to testify.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Chicago, unsurprisingly, is pretty famous for coroners making shit up to keep the homicide rate down.
    , @Brutusale
    Coroners and morgues are government agents and agencies. Their prime objective is their own continuity. Giving its superiors the data that the superiors want is high on any list of tasks that serve the agency's continued existence.

    My SWPL town had a heroin overdose in the men's room of the local coffee shop. The EMTs hit him with NARCAN and loaded him into the ambulance. After the local real estate people were done talking to the mayor, the item appeared in the police report as a drunk coffee shop patron.

    We can't handle the truth.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Jack D
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. If they are promptly defibrillated, you might be able to get it going again (or maybe not) .

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone's death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril - maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Or maybe you were trying to escape a violent mob.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Harry Baldwin
    "White supremacists are normal ass white people..."

    I guess it's better to be normal ass white people than creepy ass crackers.

    In both uses, the “ass” is intended to add a derogatory accent to the adjective.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @anon
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart.

    I am aware of that. But I'm also aware of the fact that being obese and a smoker weakens your heart, and makes it a lot easier for that to happen.

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow.

    Obviously. I was just pointing out that her obesity was a contributing factor.

    Of course, her decision to stand in the street and block traffic in the middle of a riot was an even bigger contributing factor, so it's kind of academic anyway.

    Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

    I don't know. It was considered kind of cool by a lot of people for a long time. Protesters have been blocking traffic for years, and people have been driving their cars into them for years. You used to see Black Lives Matter blocking traffic, and you'd always hear comments from people talking about what they'd do if they were in that situation. It wasn't until the middle of this August that people decided it was "terrorism".

    You can go on YouTube and find dozens of videos of people driving cars into protesters blocking the street. In each and every one of them that was posted prior to this summer, the comments were overwhelmingly on the side of the drivers. The mildest ones are along the lines of "Well, if you don't want to get hit by a car, don't stand in the middle of the street.".

    So while I certainly don't endorse it, it was considered "cool" for a long time.

    maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.

    If someone crashes a car into another car which hits me and I have a heart attack and die, I want my estate to sue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @newrouter
    Seems to be a dumb thought. Why exactly other than to employ lawyers?
    , @Opinionator
    I don't see what that proves.

    What if you were part of a violent mob that had filled the streets and put the initial driver in fear of his life?
    , @anon
    I'm sure you would. So would I.

    But then, I doubt you would have been standing in the street and unlawfully blocking traffic in the first place, so it seems a lot less likely that that would happen to you.

    I guess having your estate sue someone is nice, but I prefer the option of trying to avoid getting hit by a car in the first place.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. @Hail
    Jared Taylor has come out in defense of Tony Hovater, calling him a racial dissident.

    (Was Jared Taylor once blue-checkmarked? I recall him being so; he is now longer.)
    _____________________

    Mike Enoch writes:

    I'm thinking that Richard Fausset figured his angle was "Look, this guy is totally normal, but also a Nazi. See, anyone can be a Nazi so watch out for Nazis everywhere." But he totally f***ed up from the perspective of his bosses. The blue checks are going insane over the piece. Which gives away that they will not stand for any journalism that is not purely agenda driven.

    In the course of writing, Richard Fausset probably grew to actually like Tony and on some level his conscience kicked in and he couldn't just smear him. Huge mistake for his career. Look at the reactions of agenda setting Jews like Ezra Klein.

    Richard Fausset did it wrong. He was supposed to bring back a hit piece or some useful information, preferably both. He did neither. Instead he gave US a propaganda win.

    Funny thing is, I spoke to Tony and it turns out that he actually DOES have seasonal allergies and occasionally takes an antihistamine. And Richard Fausset totally failed to even mention this in his article. What the hell was he thinking?
     
    _____________________

    A certain Mr Greenblatt, who it seems this very year has risen from mere second-tier government-apparatus-hanger-on in some obscure ideological-enforcement department of USGov, to Chief Suppressor of Anti-Semitism for the United States (i.e., new Head of the ADL; this may as well be a government position), writes:

    It's critical for the press, when covering professional hatemongers, to avoid treating the abnormal as normal or to humanize the inhumane. By that basic measure, I'd score this @NYTimes piece: #Nazis- 1, @Public- 0.
     
    Hey, at least he gave us that extra 'e' and didn't settle for his (likely) insinct, 'inhuman'!

    More importantly, shall we treat Greenblatt as 'abnormal'? Is ethnic activism and likely allegiance to a foreign state 'normal' or 'abnormal'?

    All this greenblatting & projecting led bored identity to the very nadir of talmudodgery:

    ” You know who else used to vilify political opponents as being inhumane unt abnormal ? “

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. syonredux says:
    @Random Lurker
    But are they “normal-ass white people” or “normal ass-white people”? Hmm..

    But are they “normal-ass white people” or “normal ass-white people”? Hmm..

    WOKE bestiary:

    “Normal-ass white people”= Nazis

    “Normal ass-white people”=Nazis

    Verdict: Distinction without a difference

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. newrouter says:
    @Steve Sailer
    If someone crashes a car into another car which hits me and I have a heart attack and die, I want my estate to sue.

    Seems to be a dumb thought. Why exactly other than to employ lawyers?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Thomas says:
    @anon
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart.

    I am aware of that. But I'm also aware of the fact that being obese and a smoker weakens your heart, and makes it a lot easier for that to happen.

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow.

    Obviously. I was just pointing out that her obesity was a contributing factor.

    Of course, her decision to stand in the street and block traffic in the middle of a riot was an even bigger contributing factor, so it's kind of academic anyway.

    Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

    I don't know. It was considered kind of cool by a lot of people for a long time. Protesters have been blocking traffic for years, and people have been driving their cars into them for years. You used to see Black Lives Matter blocking traffic, and you'd always hear comments from people talking about what they'd do if they were in that situation. It wasn't until the middle of this August that people decided it was "terrorism".

    You can go on YouTube and find dozens of videos of people driving cars into protesters blocking the street. In each and every one of them that was posted prior to this summer, the comments were overwhelmingly on the side of the drivers. The mildest ones are along the lines of "Well, if you don't want to get hit by a car, don't stand in the middle of the street.".

    So while I certainly don't endorse it, it was considered "cool" for a long time.

    maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.

    In that case, you’re talking about a defense of necessity (which generally isn’t recognized in homicide cases most of the time), not causation.

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable. And, generally, in both tort and criminal law, there is what they call the “eggshell skull” rule, that a defendant “takes the victim as they find them,” meaning that even if there is some pre-existing physical or medical vulnerability on the part of the victim, the defendant will still be held responsible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Doesn't murder require the intent to kill?
    , @anon
    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable.

    It's pretty bizarre and unusual for someone to be standing in the street and blocking traffic in the middle of a riot.

    Imagine you were running out of a burning building and, right after you got out the door, you ran into an old lady, knocked her over, and she hit her head on something and died.

    Are you liable? Sure, I suppose so. But you can still argue that you were just trying to get to safety, and you couldn't help the fact that she was standing there and blocking your exit. It obviously wouldn't be the same thing as you just taking it upon yourself to run into the old lady for no reason, on an uncrowded sidewalk or something.

    I mean, I can't say for sure that Fields will be able to convince people of that. But it's certainly possible.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Steve Sailer
    If someone crashes a car into another car which hits me and I have a heart attack and die, I want my estate to sue.

    I don’t see what that proves.

    What if you were part of a violent mob that had filled the streets and put the initial driver in fear of his life?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    He isolated the one legal argument being contested (being directly vs indirectly hit). Now you're introducing a new one (whether the driver felt in fear for his life and if the victim was partially responsible for that).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Thomas

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.
     
    In that case, you're talking about a defense of necessity (which generally isn't recognized in homicide cases most of the time), not causation.

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened "but for" the defendant's action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable. And, generally, in both tort and criminal law, there is what they call the "eggshell skull" rule, that a defendant "takes the victim as they find them," meaning that even if there is some pre-existing physical or medical vulnerability on the part of the victim, the defendant will still be held responsible.

    Doesn’t murder require the intent to kill?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    Doesn’t murder require the intent to kill?
     
    Yes but that’s a separate issue. We’re talking about causation.
    , @Jack D
    One type of murder is called "depraved heart" murder - even though you don't specifically intend to kill, you act with extreme indifference to human life. The classic example is firing a gun into a crowd of strangers. You have no specific intention to kill anyone but if someone dies then you are still guilty of murder. Driving a car into a crowd would also qualify.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Thomas says:
    @Opinionator
    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the "cause" of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a "but for" sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of "ultimate" cause?

    How much societal pressure was there pointing this coroner in the direction of a "blunt force trauma" conclusion?

    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the “cause” of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a “but for” sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of “ultimate” cause?

    “But for” is sufficient to convict someone, absent some sort of bizarre or unforeseeable intervening cause.

    In cases in which a coroner’s finding can be disputed, a defendant might try to introduce their own expert to testify.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    “But for” is sufficient to convict someone, absent some sort of bizarre or unforeseeable intervening cause.

    Because "but for" causes run to the infinite, you'll have to flesh out this comment for it to have much value to the discussion here. In other words, "but for" is hardly sufficient to convict someone.

    For many reasons. In the case of the charge of "murder," one obvious one is the possibility that some form of intent must be found to exist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @gcochran
    A heart attack and blunt force trauma to the chest are not the same thing: only an idiot or liar would equate them.

    Can they exist concurrently? Can one lead to the other? Is a particular cause of death autopsy conclusion always certain, or can the evidence sometimes lend itself to several plausible competing explanations?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Thomas

    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the “cause” of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a “but for” sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of “ultimate” cause?
     
    "But for" is sufficient to convict someone, absent some sort of bizarre or unforeseeable intervening cause.

    In cases in which a coroner's finding can be disputed, a defendant might try to introduce their own expert to testify.

    “But for” is sufficient to convict someone, absent some sort of bizarre or unforeseeable intervening cause.

    Because “but for” causes run to the infinite, you’ll have to flesh out this comment for it to have much value to the discussion here. In other words, “but for” is hardly sufficient to convict someone.

    For many reasons. In the case of the charge of “murder,” one obvious one is the possibility that some form of intent must be found to exist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    See my other comment. Obviously the other elements of a crime have to be present (actus reus, mens rea, etc.). We’re here talking about a hypothetical issue of causation being litigated.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Opinionator
    I don't see what that proves.

    What if you were part of a violent mob that had filled the streets and put the initial driver in fear of his life?

    He isolated the one legal argument being contested (being directly vs indirectly hit). Now you’re introducing a new one (whether the driver felt in fear for his life and if the victim was partially responsible for that).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Those are both good questions.
    , @eah
    People have either left or been pulled from their vehicles, and then were badly injured or killed -- eg perhaps most famously Reginald Denny -- also more recently:

    St. Louis’ Bosnian community sees hammer murder as hate crime

    Begic was driving with his fiancee, Arijana Mujkanovic, and a male passenger at about 1:15 a.m. Sunday in St. Louis when five teenagers began pounding his vehicle with a hammer, according to police. When Begic confronted them, he was struck in the mouth, face, head and body with hammers and died at a nearby hospital.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. ( Nothing is OT in The Curent Lost Decade)

    Meanwhile, The Great Pretender Sugahilligula is having a funny root canal procedure on his way to the Forum:

    DPmBRdkXUAEbZXv.jpg (JPEG Image, 960 × 570 pixels) – Scaled (80%)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  116. Only in the NYT can a party be avowedly socialist and still “extreme right wing.”

    From the NYT article: “In 2015, he helped start the Traditionalist Worker Party, one of the extreme right-wing groups”

    From https://www.tradworker.org/points/ :

    “2. National Socialism

    Today’s global capitalist system is the enemy of all humanity and represents the greatest threat to the continued existence of our people. ”

    Other points:
    “social justice,”
    “healthcare as a right,”,
    “end to foreclosures on families with children and the elderly” (housing as a right),
    nationalization of key industries,
    anti-usury,
    mandatory paid maternity and paternity leave,
    pro-life,
    anti free trade,
    communist party governmental structure,
    only partial religious freedom (certain religions banned, no “wall of separation” between church and state),
    restricted immigration,
    cease interventionism,
    infrastructure spending,
    strong military,
    large tax breaks for married couples & children,
    end no-fault divorce,
    “right to work” (different than the union-related laws of the same name),
    strong social safety net,
    national workers’ union,
    workers own share of company,
    limited freedom of speech (they guarantee “freedom of speech” but then list a host of restrictions, the “Yes, but…” method that really means “no freedom of speech”),
    right to keep and bear arms,
    state-imposed morality,
    death penalty for drug-trafficking,
    and so on.

    The party is insane. Adopting policy points from the modern “left” and “right” and outright Nazi, all in service to the sort of authoritarian national socialist state that is left wing in most respects — resembling the People’s Republic of China more than it represents any free nation.

    Sounds like a radical leftist party to me.

    These are the sorts of alt-righters I can’t abide. When you see the authoritarianism and socialism dripping from their documents, you can practically smell the gulags. Like all revolutionaries, they think they’re going to be the ones deciding who gets sent to the gulags or the guillotines.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Cloudbuster:

    You see authoritarianism and socialism "dripping" from their [Traditionalist Worker Party] documents.

    I, on the contrary, see many Distributism elements. Some of which were forwarded by G K Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, amongst others.
    , @Jack D

    Only in the NYT can a party be avowedly socialist and still “extreme right wing.”
     
    The last time I looked, "National Socialist" included the word "Socialist". This may be a hint that Nazi ideology involves elements of socialism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @JerryC

    The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don’t understand that – if Steve said this most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won’t permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing.
     
    Seems pretty clear to me the guy intended to imply that "normal ass white people" are by definition evil white supremacists. And have been since 1776 (only since 1776?). So no one should be surprised when one of them is outed as diabolical crypto-nazi.

    There are two things going on here, and the NYT is either oblivious or playing dumb.

    The first is that the Mother Jones left thinks that anyone who voted for Trump is a “Nazi”.

    The second is that this drummer, who voted for Trump, is a Nazi sympathizer, without the quotes.

    Now, obviously, the NYT could have found plenty of Trump supporters who would have told them the same things about Travon Martin, etc., without adding the bit about Hitler not being such a bad guy. A cynical explanation of why they profiled the Nazi sympathizer was that they wanted to tar the rest of the Trump right as Nazi sympathizers.

    If so, that seems to have backfired.

    The left’s crazed reaction to the profile is, I suspect, not because they really fear Nazism is being normalized, but because they fear that a lot of readers will dismiss the Nazi stuff as harmless LARPing and get red pilled by the non-Nazi dissident right stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    The second is that this drummer, who voted for Trump, is a Nazi sympathizer, without the quotes.


    He is a neo nazi without the quotes. To quote the platform of the party that he founded: We demand a National Socialist government, economy, and society for our people

    https://www.tradworker.org/points/

    The author could have completely pilloried the guy by getting him to be specific about certain issues but he chose not to for whatever reason. Maybe you're right and they thought the light stuff he chose to include (nazi armbands for sale, hitler being not as bad as the other major figures of national socialism [how this amounts to an endorsement of national socialism is unclear]) would be enough to disgrace the guy but the fact is the author didn't no nearly as far as he easily could have and I would argue was obligated to.

    But if leads people to consider a milder alternative to nazism (14 with out 88) than I guess it's good thing as far as I'm concerned

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Guy de Champlagne
    He isolated the one legal argument being contested (being directly vs indirectly hit). Now you're introducing a new one (whether the driver felt in fear for his life and if the victim was partially responsible for that).

    Those are both good questions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. eah says:
    @Chris Mallory
    Straw man.
    Look up the "eggshell doctrine".
    Frailty of a victim is not a defense. If you punch a man who, for what ever reason, has a paper thin skull and he dies, you will be charged with his death. Doesn't matter if you knew about the condition of the skull or not. Doesn't matter if the punch would not have affect a man with a normal skull. You take your victim as you find them.

    If you commit a crime against a group of people and one of them dies of a heart attack, depending upon state law you might be charged with their death.

    The question here is to what degree was the driver of the car culpable for the car hitting the group.

    Was it purely an accident? He still might face civil penalties, even if it was an accident.
    Was it manslaughter? Pre-meditated?

    There are cases from Wisconsin, Louisiana, and Maine in the past 5 years where a bystander died of a heart attack and the person who perpetrated the act which lead to the death was charged.

    There has been a lot of speculation about the driver's motives and state of mind. But until the issue is decided in court that is all it is, speculation.

    If you punch a man who, for what ever reason, has a paper thin skull and he dies, you will be charged with his death.

    She wasn’t struck by the car — the media has consistently promoted the lie that she died because she was hit by the car, which is not true — this is basically what I wrote, and is basically what the NYT is doing: anyone reading this will assume Heyer died of traumatic injuries after being struck by the car (“killing”) — not to mention that it’s a completely irrelevant/unrelated smear aimed at Hovater — there was absolutely no reason to mention that incident here.

    There are cases from Wisconsin, Louisiana, and Maine in the past 5 years where a bystander died of a heart attack and the person who perpetrated the act which lead to the death was charged.

    Men facing murder charges after robbery bystander suffers heart attack

    One suspect refused to call an ambulance and continued to snatch money while Kneubuehl suffered the medical emergency, according to court documents…Kneubuehl had a history of heart problems, according to his crew members.

    Zimmerman was also “charged” with murder — being charged is not the same as being convicted — by that same, err, (legal) logic, the Alt-Right people who organized the rally could also be charged with the helicopter deaths, since otherwise it would not have been flying — which would be absurd — as Fields being charged with or convicted of Heyer’s death would be.

    Fields should request a change of venue, maybe all the way to CA, where deliberately infecting someone with HIV is no longer a felony.

    Lastly, look up the definition of ‘straw man’ — I don’t think the description fits here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    Your constant waving the flag about the victim's health is a straw man to take the attention away from the fact that the only thing that matters in this case is how culpable the driver was for running into the crowd. Her poor health will not mitigate his guilt if he is found at fault.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Thomas says:
    @Opinionator
    Doesn't murder require the intent to kill?

    Doesn’t murder require the intent to kill?

    Yes but that’s a separate issue. We’re talking about causation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    No, we were talking about criminal liability. You had used the word "liability" in your prior comment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Thomas says:
    @Opinionator
    “But for” is sufficient to convict someone, absent some sort of bizarre or unforeseeable intervening cause.

    Because "but for" causes run to the infinite, you'll have to flesh out this comment for it to have much value to the discussion here. In other words, "but for" is hardly sufficient to convict someone.

    For many reasons. In the case of the charge of "murder," one obvious one is the possibility that some form of intent must be found to exist.

    See my other comment. Obviously the other elements of a crime have to be present (actus reus, mens rea, etc.). We’re here talking about a hypothetical issue of causation being litigated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. eah says:

    More interesting (but not surprising) here is the completely OTT reaction of some Jews — they inevitably overplay their hand:

    Read More
    • LOL: Thomas
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  123. eah says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    He isolated the one legal argument being contested (being directly vs indirectly hit). Now you're introducing a new one (whether the driver felt in fear for his life and if the victim was partially responsible for that).

    People have either left or been pulled from their vehicles, and then were badly injured or killed — eg perhaps most famously Reginald Denny — also more recently:

    St. Louis’ Bosnian community sees hammer murder as hate crime

    Begic was driving with his fiancee, Arijana Mujkanovic, and a male passenger at about 1:15 a.m. Sunday in St. Louis when five teenagers began pounding his vehicle with a hammer, according to police. When Begic confronted them, he was struck in the mouth, face, head and body with hammers and died at a nearby hospital.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    https://twitter.com/mikeenochsback/status/934881218771980288
    , @Anon
    Jesus Christ, he got out of a car to confront 5 blacks who were pounding away at his car with hammers? What a stupid idea. He should have just floored it and gotten out of there. What on earth did he think they were trying to do with those hammers? They were trying to cause harm, and they got what they wanted. Running them over would have served them right, and he could claim self-defense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. eah says:
    @eah
    People have either left or been pulled from their vehicles, and then were badly injured or killed -- eg perhaps most famously Reginald Denny -- also more recently:

    St. Louis’ Bosnian community sees hammer murder as hate crime

    Begic was driving with his fiancee, Arijana Mujkanovic, and a male passenger at about 1:15 a.m. Sunday in St. Louis when five teenagers began pounding his vehicle with a hammer, according to police. When Begic confronted them, he was struck in the mouth, face, head and body with hammers and died at a nearby hospital.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    The important thing to remember is that the lie about Heyer's death/murder was used as an excuse/pretext to purge the Alt-Right after the Charlottesville mess:

    So to summarize, a morbidly obese Heyer died in Charlottesville, not from the car crash, but from a heart attack. The leftist media and other leftist organizations, doctor the story up as a clear cut murder case and by extension condemn every person there who was on the same side of the protests as the driver. The left, ever searching for it’s great white defendant, gleefully seized upon the excuse to carry out a purge and silencing campaign against anyone they can track down on the non-Establishment Right, and effect a chilling campaign against anyone who would dare question the Narrative, as a desperate attempt to regain absolute control over Information which they have been steadily losing due to the internet.
    , @Cagey Beast
    I just spotted an extremely interesting tweet from a normie account in reply to that one you posted from Enoch. The tweeter was:

    Current Affairs is a magazine that publishes bi-monthly in print and online. It was started by Nathan J. Robinson, a PhD student at Harvard University, in 2015 via a Kickstarter campaign. Its stated aims are to be an informative and entertaining independent publication.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Affairs_(magazine)

    This is a break from the tried-and-true technique of "dynamic silence"* developed in the last century. This is even a break from the second line of defence currently being deployed: they will talk about "bad" people but almost never to them.

    It's very interesting to see they're learning and adapting.

    * http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_silence

    https://twitter.com/curaffairs/status/935180261515563009

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Dave Pinsen
    There are two things going on here, and the NYT is either oblivious or playing dumb.

    The first is that the Mother Jones left thinks that anyone who voted for Trump is a "Nazi".

    The second is that this drummer, who voted for Trump, is a Nazi sympathizer, without the quotes.

    Now, obviously, the NYT could have found plenty of Trump supporters who would have told them the same things about Travon Martin, etc., without adding the bit about Hitler not being such a bad guy. A cynical explanation of why they profiled the Nazi sympathizer was that they wanted to tar the rest of the Trump right as Nazi sympathizers.

    If so, that seems to have backfired.

    The left's crazed reaction to the profile is, I suspect, not because they really fear Nazism is being normalized, but because they fear that a lot of readers will dismiss the Nazi stuff as harmless LARPing and get red pilled by the non-Nazi dissident right stuff.

    The second is that this drummer, who voted for Trump, is a Nazi sympathizer, without the quotes.

    He is a neo nazi without the quotes. To quote the platform of the party that he founded: We demand a National Socialist government, economy, and society for our people

    https://www.tradworker.org/points/

    The author could have completely pilloried the guy by getting him to be specific about certain issues but he chose not to for whatever reason. Maybe you’re right and they thought the light stuff he chose to include (nazi armbands for sale, hitler being not as bad as the other major figures of national socialism [how this amounts to an endorsement of national socialism is unclear]) would be enough to disgrace the guy but the fact is the author didn’t no nearly as far as he easily could have and I would argue was obligated to.

    But if leads people to consider a milder alternative to nazism (14 with out 88) than I guess it’s good thing as far as I’m concerned

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Roger says: • Website

    The NY Times says it removed the link to the site selling swastika armbands.

    Did anyone save it? Some readers here might want to do some Christmas shopping.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  127. eah says:
    @eah
    https://twitter.com/mikeenochsback/status/934881218771980288

    The important thing to remember is that the lie about Heyer’s death/murder was used as an excuse/pretext to purge the Alt-Right after the Charlottesville mess:

    So to summarize, a morbidly obese Heyer died in Charlottesville, not from the car crash, but from a heart attack. The leftist media and other leftist organizations, doctor the story up as a clear cut murder case and by extension condemn every person there who was on the same side of the protests as the driver. The left, ever searching for it’s great white defendant, gleefully seized upon the excuse to carry out a purge and silencing campaign against anyone they can track down on the non-Establishment Right, and effect a chilling campaign against anyone who would dare question the Narrative, as a desperate attempt to regain absolute control over Information which they have been steadily losing due to the internet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Why did her heart attack happen to coincide with the car crash?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @eah
    The important thing to remember is that the lie about Heyer's death/murder was used as an excuse/pretext to purge the Alt-Right after the Charlottesville mess:

    So to summarize, a morbidly obese Heyer died in Charlottesville, not from the car crash, but from a heart attack. The leftist media and other leftist organizations, doctor the story up as a clear cut murder case and by extension condemn every person there who was on the same side of the protests as the driver. The left, ever searching for it’s great white defendant, gleefully seized upon the excuse to carry out a purge and silencing campaign against anyone they can track down on the non-Establishment Right, and effect a chilling campaign against anyone who would dare question the Narrative, as a desperate attempt to regain absolute control over Information which they have been steadily losing due to the internet.

    Why did her heart attack happen to coincide with the car crash?

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    I have no idea -- if you read the link about the (fairly recent) Wisconsin case (above), it says:

    The Dane County Medical Examiner’s Office said Kneubuehl’s heart attack was caused by stress and he likely would’ve survived had he received medical attention.

    Note that case is complicated by the claim his attack/distress was obvious, but medical help was not summoned (for obvious reasons) -- again the main point here is that even long after it is clear 1) she was not struck by the car, and 2) she died of a heart attack, the NYT (and other outlets) continue to propagandize her death by attributing it to murderous rightwing violence.

    It looks like whether Fields will be charged with her death -- since his car/driving can be seen as the source of the "stress" that triggered a heart attack -- depends on legal precedent and how malicious the prosecutor is -- to me such a charge would be absurd/malicious.

    BTW, WTF was she doing there anyway? -- did the (out of control) group she was with have a permit to block the street? -- the Lee rally was to take place in a park, and had a permit -- there is a better case to be made that the Charlotesville authorities who allowed these circumstances to develop are more responsible for Heyer's death than Fields, who per the other examples I posted could be seen as having a reasonable and justifiable fear for his health/life from the 'antifa' mob.

    ‘What’s Happening to America?’ Trump Supporter Beaten by Chicago Mob Speaks Out
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Daniel H says:
    @European-American

    The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, “Pinch” Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers.
     
    Not anymore. The Times now makes more money from subscribers than from advertisers.

    Twenty years ago, advertising revenue made up 63 percent of the paper’s revenues, while subscription revenue accounted for 27 percent. As of Q1, those numbers are nearly inverted: Subscriptions account for 61 percent and advertising represents 33 percent of the top line.

    How the New York Times saved itself
    Subscriptions, not ads.
    BY PETER KAFKA AND RANI MOLLA MAY 4, 2017, 5:22PM EDT
    https://www.recode.net/2017/5/4/15550052/new-york-times-subscription-advertising-revenue-chart

     

    More about how the NYT is increasingly focusing on subscribers, not advertisers:
    https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/fn_nyt_chart.svg
    https://www.wired.com/2017/02/new-york-times-digital-journalism/

    Smart tech analysts like Ben Thompson have explained why general news services have become pretty useless to advertisers.
    https://stratechery.com/2015/popping-the-publishing-bubble/

    So if you think the NYT has become ever more of a niche SJW mouthpiece and ever less a neutral news source, well, there’s a sound business reason for that.

    >>As of Q1, those numbers are nearly inverted: Subscriptions account for 61 percent and advertising represents 33 percent of the top line.

    Good point, but this statistic can be misleading. If 20 years ago – let’s pick a round number – the top line was $500 million, then advertising accounted for $300 million and subscription accounted for $150 million +/-. But today overall top line revenue is down. And it is down mainly because 1) advertisers are advertising less on print and digital media, and 2) what they do spend on advertising os much lower per inch of page space than what they spent 20 years ago. So – let’s pick another round number – lets say that top line revenue is $200 million today, then $60 million is coming from advertisers and $120 million is coming from subscribers. So they are making significantly less money overall and even the absolute revenue coming in from subscribers – despite being a greater portion of total revenue – is still less than it was 2o years ago. Now, my point uses numbers that I pulled out of my head, but I wouldn’t be surprised if my argument is telling the true story. As we go forward, this much is certain, top line revenue will continue to fall and no amount of subscriber revenue will be sufficient to keep the paper afloat in its current condition. The NY Times future is of the likes of VOX, Slate or UNZ.

    Read More
    • Agree: European-American
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @Thomas

    Doesn’t murder require the intent to kill?
     
    Yes but that’s a separate issue. We’re talking about causation.

    No, we were talking about criminal liability. You had used the word “liability” in your prior comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable.
     
    That's the only place I've mentioned any variant of the word "liability" (and not even that word per se) in this discussion, and, as the first nine words of that sentence makes clear, I'm discussing causation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. eah says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Why did her heart attack happen to coincide with the car crash?

    I have no idea — if you read the link about the (fairly recent) Wisconsin case (above), it says:

    The Dane County Medical Examiner’s Office said Kneubuehl’s heart attack was caused by stress and he likely would’ve survived had he received medical attention.

    Note that case is complicated by the claim his attack/distress was obvious, but medical help was not summoned (for obvious reasons) — again the main point here is that even long after it is clear 1) she was not struck by the car, and 2) she died of a heart attack, the NYT (and other outlets) continue to propagandize her death by attributing it to murderous rightwing violence.

    It looks like whether Fields will be charged with her death — since his car/driving can be seen as the source of the “stress” that triggered a heart attack — depends on legal precedent and how malicious the prosecutor is — to me such a charge would be absurd/malicious.

    BTW, WTF was she doing there anyway? — did the (out of control) group she was with have a permit to block the street? — the Lee rally was to take place in a park, and had a permit — there is a better case to be made that the Charlotesville authorities who allowed these circumstances to develop are more responsible for Heyer’s death than Fields, who per the other examples I posted could be seen as having a reasonable and justifiable fear for his health/life from the ‘antifa’ mob.

    ‘What’s Happening to America?’ Trump Supporter Beaten by Chicago Mob Speaks Out

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @eah
    People have either left or been pulled from their vehicles, and then were badly injured or killed -- eg perhaps most famously Reginald Denny -- also more recently:

    St. Louis’ Bosnian community sees hammer murder as hate crime

    Begic was driving with his fiancee, Arijana Mujkanovic, and a male passenger at about 1:15 a.m. Sunday in St. Louis when five teenagers began pounding his vehicle with a hammer, according to police. When Begic confronted them, he was struck in the mouth, face, head and body with hammers and died at a nearby hospital.

    Jesus Christ, he got out of a car to confront 5 blacks who were pounding away at his car with hammers? What a stupid idea. He should have just floored it and gotten out of there. What on earth did he think they were trying to do with those hammers? They were trying to cause harm, and they got what they wanted. Running them over would have served them right, and he could claim self-defense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. rogue-one says:
    @Daniel H
    Clearest expression yet why the NY Times is doomed as a business and will only exist as a charity in the future. They have forgotten (or maybe, for decades, haven't even known) what business they are in. They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion. The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, "Pinch" Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers. Everything else is beside the point. A circle-jerk of virtue signaling white SJW readers is not valuable enough for your paying customers to continue to do so.

    NYTimes has a lot of influence and will retain it for near to medium term future. It is premier newspaper of the country and sets the cultural agenda for other newspapers to follow.

    If it doesn’t make money, some billionaire will bail it out (on expectation that nytimes never mention his monopoly).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Svigor says:

    White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.”

    Is it “ass-white”? Is that some kind of code? A way of saying that Whites are as white as their own asses? Can we get a ruling on this?

    ***

    I love Ohio Nazis. (Actually, around here I suppose I can admit that I don’t like Nazis. It’s a practical thing, not an ideological thing; Nazis are mostly rigid, tone-deaf, assholes who seem more about LARPing than anything related to the real world.)

    The genesis of the story was the aftermath of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August, the terrifying Ku Klux Klan-like images of young white men carrying tiki torches and shouting “Jews will not replace us,” and the subsequent violence that included the killing of a woman, Heather D. Heyer.

    From what I gather, it was “you will not replace us,” and NYT is lying about the “Jew” part. It would make sense; it’s not like pro-whites are dying to be replace, as long as Jews aren’t doing it.

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish? Because last I heard, he had no ties to anyone in the movement, previous to showing up in Charlotte. In any event, it seems likely Fields is gonna beat that rap.

    beginning for his life

    Proofreading seems to be a lost art.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    Is this another one of those silly 'where is the hyphen' games invented by Saint Trayvon? Creepy ass cracker? Normal ass white people? Where is Rachael Jenteal when needed?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Uxwp0NvFSQ
    , @reiner Tor

    around here I suppose I can admit that I don’t like Nazis.
     
    Coming out: I don't like Nazis much either.
    , @Jack D
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-james-fields-jr-charlottesville-20170818-story.html

    Fields, while perhaps not tied to any organized movement, had amply expressed his Nazi sympathies before Charlottesville.

    If Fields gets off, it will be on the basis that he is nuts - he had a pre-existing history of schizophrenia. His maternal grandpa was also nuts, having killed himself and his wife in a murder suicide. (Fields's mother, BTW, seems to have been cursed by the gods - in addition to losing her parents, her husband (Fields's father) died in an auto accident and she herself is paralyzed due to a different auto accident). However, insanity defenses are not well liked by juries and even if you "win" you lose because instead of being locked up in a prison they lock you up in a mental institution.

    All those who are saying that it was self -defense, that he panicked, that he did not cause Heyer's death, etc. - he'll have a chance to raise these at trial but there are many accounts to the effect that he charged into the crowd from a side street and then backed away. Maybe if he can get 12 fellow Nazis on the jury they will buy this version of reality (hey, it worked for OJ) but otherwise, good luck.

    , @ben tillman

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish?
     
    His mom's named Bloom, and I've never head of a gentile named Bloom. His name is Fields, and the only Fields I've ever known is Jewish, but who knows about this guy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Thomas says:
    @Opinionator
    No, we were talking about criminal liability. You had used the word "liability" in your prior comment.

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable.

    That’s the only place I’ve mentioned any variant of the word “liability” (and not even that word per se) in this discussion, and, as the first nine words of that sentence makes clear, I’m discussing causation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Causation is easy: she was jaywalking. Or jaywaddling.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Opinionator
    Nobody wants to start a new society with the likes of Macklemore chick or that Maddow fellow, do they?

    That Maddow fellow?

    That Maddow fellow?

    They have internet in your nursing home?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Dan Hayes says:
    @Cloudbuster
    Only in the NYT can a party be avowedly socialist and still "extreme right wing."

    From the NYT article: "In 2015, he helped start the Traditionalist Worker Party, one of the extreme right-wing groups"

    From https://www.tradworker.org/points/ :

    "2. National Socialism

    Today’s global capitalist system is the enemy of all humanity and represents the greatest threat to the continued existence of our people. "

    Other points:
    "social justice,"
    "healthcare as a right,",
    "end to foreclosures on families with children and the elderly" (housing as a right),
    nationalization of key industries,
    anti-usury,
    mandatory paid maternity and paternity leave,
    pro-life,
    anti free trade,
    communist party governmental structure,
    only partial religious freedom (certain religions banned, no "wall of separation" between church and state),
    restricted immigration,
    cease interventionism,
    infrastructure spending,
    strong military,
    large tax breaks for married couples & children,
    end no-fault divorce,
    "right to work" (different than the union-related laws of the same name),
    strong social safety net,
    national workers' union,
    workers own share of company,
    limited freedom of speech (they guarantee "freedom of speech" but then list a host of restrictions, the "Yes, but..." method that really means "no freedom of speech"),
    right to keep and bear arms,
    state-imposed morality,
    death penalty for drug-trafficking,
    and so on.

    The party is insane. Adopting policy points from the modern "left" and "right" and outright Nazi, all in service to the sort of authoritarian national socialist state that is left wing in most respects -- resembling the People's Republic of China more than it represents any free nation.

    Sounds like a radical leftist party to me.

    These are the sorts of alt-righters I can't abide. When you see the authoritarianism and socialism dripping from their documents, you can practically smell the gulags. Like all revolutionaries, they think they're going to be the ones deciding who gets sent to the gulags or the guillotines.

    Cloudbuster:

    You see authoritarianism and socialism “dripping” from their [Traditionalist Worker Party] documents.

    I, on the contrary, see many Distributism elements. Some of which were forwarded by G K Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, amongst others.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    Yes, I see that, but I'd argue that Distributism despite its support for private property would devolve in actual practice into fairly standard authoritarian socialism.

    There are planks in the TradWorkers party points that I have absolutely no problem with, but overall, it's an extremely authoritarian document.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Pericles says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?

    I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know if you mean Fermi or Fermat but why don't you look up the biography of Enrico Fermi and get back to me.

    The guy is a neo nazi. The article doesn't ever take him for task and get at why he likes national socialism and nazi germany so much. There is something inherently nasty, gorish, and ignorant about neo nazism given the realities of history and the article almost totally ignores those dimensions of his ideology.

    It's a genuinely bad article that actually deserves the condemnation it's getting.

    He strains at nazi gnats, but has already swallowed the commie camel. Yummy!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Svigor says:

    Like all revolutionaries, they think they’re going to be the ones deciding who gets sent to the gulags or the guillotines.

    I’d like to take this opportunity to point out that the United States of America was founded on a violent revolution, carried out by racist white men.

    Nazi sympathizer was that they wanted to tar the rest of the Trump right as Nazi sympathizers.

    Any right-winger worth the label is a Nazi sympathizer, according to communists. And the communists have a point, because it only makes sense to have a level of sympathy with the idea of getting rough with the people who carried out the Holodomor and Soviet genocide, and were looking to repeat the process in Germany. Not to mention the million who were starved to death by Germany’s opponents in World War I (I’d guess Americans might react negatively to the possibility of repeating a history like that).

    Also, I don’t see the point of right-wingers getting het up over Nazis’ misdeeds, when communists (AKA lefties, AKA liberals, AKA Democrats) don’t give a shit about communist misdeeds. Or hound neo-Nazis, when we’re hip-deep in communists who tolerate open Marxist-Leninists in their midst.

    More interesting (but not surprising) here is the completely OTT reaction of some Jews — they inevitably overplay their hand:

    It’s amusing how het up Jews get over “holocaust denial,” when the vast majority are themselves ignorant of the Orthodox Narrative. Put another way, you could probably selectively quote Orthodox Jewish scholars and authorities on the holocaust but present the quotes as authored by “holocaust deniers” and get Jews to run around with their wigs half-off.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  140. Pericles says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    Yeah and that's a perfectly reasonable criticism to make of the times. Although at least with wars theres some amount of violence assumed by any reasonable reader while in the US domestic politics is assumed to be free of large scale political violence.

    while in the US domestic politics is assumed to be free of large scale political violence.

    The peace loving Antifa and BLM movements fully agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Pericles says:
    @Jack D
    If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. If they are promptly defibrillated, you might be able to get it going again (or maybe not) .

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone's death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril - maybe you just intended to break a few legs and scatter the crowd, but if someone dies you are going to take the rap.

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

    So if you’re part of a mob attacking a car which then — perhaps to escape or in confusion — drives into a crowd, you’re responsible?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Fields's defense will have the opportunity at his murder trial to introduce evidence that Fields was in fear for his life and merely attempting to flee and that he did not intentionally plow into the demonstrators. If the jury believes this bullshit from a Nazi, then he will get off or be found guilty of some lesser charge but I wouldn't hold my breath.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Question for Sailer:

    In the nearest future, what are the chances that some social justice conscious built-in algorithm in self-driving Teslagoogluber will be capable to autonomously solve SJ Trolley Problem in real time?

    Hypothetical Situation 1:

    Tesla’s semi-truck autopilot is about to collude with an excursion bus packed with Howard University freshman class….unless it decides, in the last second, to swerve to the left and run over some mariachi band unfortunates who were fixing flat tire on their Jetta.

    In aftermath, does Elon get forced to write monthly checks to La Raza, or cashing out tens of millions to the Black Rainbow Coalition Matters is Musk’s only road to redemption?

    Hypothetical Situation 2:

    A driverless- 90 miles per hour speeding- metal mustang loaded with edgy ideas,has to choose between it’s-ok-to-be-white-blob and some similar, but melanin enriched, gentle giant.

    Who ends up being scraped from the windshield?

    Hypothetical Situation 3:

    Late Al Jolson ( right after another minstrel gig) is dozing behind the wheel of his brand new autonomous Google-Escapade, while his peer, Notorious RBG ( right after another 6 gorillion push-ups gym session ) is doing the same but from the opposite direction….in one-way traffic line.

    Is that the way the algorithm crumbles?

    ******************************************************************************************************************

    bored identity used this article as an inspiration:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/11/23/self-driving-cars-programmed-decide-who-dies-crash/891493001/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  143. @Guy de Champlagne
    It is a ridiculous article. The guy is a actual, literal, neo-nazi and the article almost completely elided over the nastiness, gore, and ignorance inherent to what that means.

    There are any number of white nationalist who deserve the kind of sympathetic, thoughtful portrayal that this guy got but neo nazis don't.

    We shouldn’t be lazy and accept the leftist Narrative, especially not if it’s glaringly stupid.

    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler. You know, actual Nazis didn’t deny the holocaust, they condoned it. While the actual methods of the holocaust were (badly guarded) state secrets, Hitler didn’t really deny the holocaust, he frequently and openly talked in his speeches about how Jewry was disappearing from Europe, and how his “prophecy” made in 1939 about a world war resulting in the destruction of European Jewry was coming true.

    Nazis were bad because they committed the holocaust, not because they denied it. (See above, it’s even questionable how much they actually denied it.) Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad, and because he also worships Hitler, resolves the contradiction by denying the holocaust even happened.

    So holocaust-deniers are not that bad (at least not necessarily bad): presumably they wouldn’t want to do something which they consider bad, so they wouldn’t commit the holocaust, even if they worship Hitler. They are not really Nazis.

    Okay, they might lie about it just so that they have another shot at committing another holocaust, but since A) they have no chance of actually coming to power and B) they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy de Champlagne
    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler.

    He's a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad,

    I've seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn't happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small. The only person who I've ever heard say that was George Lincoln Rockwell and that was decades ago. Most don't make any moral judgment about it. Neonazis also make no bones of their hatred of jews and never provide any non final-solution style solutions. So what exactly is a reasonable person left to assume they want to do?

    And it all raises the question why someone would embrace nazism but only a nazism that goes completely contrary to the commonly conceptions of the ideology and events around World War II. Why bother? It's enough work to bring people over to your side about the current state of the nation and what ought to be done for the future but embracing national socialism means you also have to spend time changing peoples view of history and conception of the nature of nazism. It's completely irrational at face value and pretty obviously a kind of dog whistling (and possibly something else).

    they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    If what you said about the comments of the nazi leadership is true you would have to be a total idiot to deny the holocaust and idiots are bad. And they also tar by association the good goals with their idiocy, violence, and commitment to an ideology that the vast majority of people find abhorrent.

    , @Jack D
    Holocaust deniers deny the Holocaust for the same reason that Muslims deny that 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslims - shame. Holocaust deniers either believe that perpetrating a Holocaust would be shameful or else perceive that the world regards it as shameful, but either way it is a stain on "their team". The easiest way to get rid of this shame/stain is to say "it didn't happen". If it never happened, there is nothing to be ashamed about. We are seeing the same thing with Fields - it didn't happen, he never rammed his car into a crowd, so WN's have nothing to be ashamed about.

    We don't come from a shame/face culture so these kind of denials in the face of clear evidence are not that common in our culture. But in shame cultures they happen all the time. People will do stuff right in front of your face and when you catch them they or their family will deny that the event even happened. You can show them video and they will still deny it. To someone from a Western culture it seems nuts but that's how the human brain works sometimes - psychological defense mechanism can be very powerful, more powerful than reality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @European-American

    The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, “Pinch” Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers.
     
    Not anymore. The Times now makes more money from subscribers than from advertisers.

    Twenty years ago, advertising revenue made up 63 percent of the paper’s revenues, while subscription revenue accounted for 27 percent. As of Q1, those numbers are nearly inverted: Subscriptions account for 61 percent and advertising represents 33 percent of the top line.

    How the New York Times saved itself
    Subscriptions, not ads.
    BY PETER KAFKA AND RANI MOLLA MAY 4, 2017, 5:22PM EDT
    https://www.recode.net/2017/5/4/15550052/new-york-times-subscription-advertising-revenue-chart

     

    More about how the NYT is increasingly focusing on subscribers, not advertisers:
    https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/fn_nyt_chart.svg
    https://www.wired.com/2017/02/new-york-times-digital-journalism/

    Smart tech analysts like Ben Thompson have explained why general news services have become pretty useless to advertisers.
    https://stratechery.com/2015/popping-the-publishing-bubble/

    So if you think the NYT has become ever more of a niche SJW mouthpiece and ever less a neutral news source, well, there’s a sound business reason for that.

    For years and years and years, my ritual has been to buy the Thanksgiving edition of the Miami Herald – the thickest paper of the year – and go through all the Black Friday ads. It’s a tribute to the Great American Orgy of Naked Consumerism.

    On Thursday, I tried to buy a copy of the English Herald, with absolutely no success. I couldn’t find a single copy for sale at any of the places where I looked – two CVSes, two Walgreenses, three gas stations, two convenience stores. Publix (a ubiquitous supermarket chain) would have had it, but all of the company’s innumerable locations were closed for the holiday. (As they should have been.)

    While driving around, I spotted a number of Herald vending machines, almost all of which were empty. (One or two of them had ruined papers from weeks ago in their display windows.) Finally, I located a vending machine that, miraculously, had a copy of the Thursday paper in the display window.

    The daily paper now costs $2*, but this edition had the weekend price of $3. (That fact was not mentioned on the price tag on the vending machine. I only noticed it when I looked through the window to verify the date of the edition.) Somehow I managed to scrounge together 12 quarters. It was only then that I discovered that the vending machine, rusted with age, was hopelessly jammed. (At least I got my money back. I had to press the Coin Return button several times, though.) So I was totally out of luck.

    I did pick up the Spanish edition of the paper for $2. It was pretty thick in its own right. A good number of the ads were bilingual, but still.

    I used to eat all the time at a restaurant at a hotel that always had big tall stacks of the Herald at the front desk, free for the taking. (This included the full Sunday paper, complete with all of the extras – the ads, the comics, the weekly TV guide, etc.) The manager told me that the hotel didn’t even request them – they were dumped off as a matter of course, to boost circulation. There were always far more copies delivered than there were rooms at the hotel – and this was a decent-sized establishment.

    For years and years and years, I never felt the need to subscribe to the paper – any paper – because free copies were lying around all over the place. Even today, the better hotels have big stacks of unread Wall Street Journals and USA Todays in the lobby.

    Not so many years ago, there were cities where entire neighborhoods got free delivery of the paper seven days a week, courtesy of one local business or another.

    The circulation figures were absolute bullshit for many years. Advertisers got royally ripped off for at least a decade.

    *Ten years ago, the daily Herald cost 35 cents in Dade, and only a quarter in Broward. As late as 2005, the Broward edition of the Sunday paper cost only 50 cents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    The Herald can't collapse, what would Leonard Pitts do? Or David Neal, the world's worst sports writer in a town where that bar is very high. I haven't been back home for 15 years, hat ever did they do with the Herald building? We used to park there for the Orange Bowl Parade.
    I had to recently call the Palm Beach Post circulation office, to have them stop littering my drive with their Sunday effort.
    , @Jack D
    For a long time, the chief source of revenue for newspapers was ads and ad rates were based on circulation, so they kept the cover price low to encourage circulation. But as ad revenues have fallen off, they have raised the cover price considerably. The papers are now down to such a small hard core of dedicated print readers that they find that these remaining readers are not price sensitive - another quarter or 50 cents is not enough to get them to break their newspaper habit. You see this in a lot of cities (at least those that still have printed daily papers).
    , @Old Palo Altan
    Far and away the most interesting comment on this entire thread.

    Too many of you spend far too much time laboriously responding to obvious trolls - and sometimes I wonder if, at least some of the time, Steve isn't one of them.

    Let's prove Pavlov wrong, shall we?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @reiner Tor
    We shouldn't be lazy and accept the leftist Narrative, especially not if it's glaringly stupid.

    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler. You know, actual Nazis didn't deny the holocaust, they condoned it. While the actual methods of the holocaust were (badly guarded) state secrets, Hitler didn't really deny the holocaust, he frequently and openly talked in his speeches about how Jewry was disappearing from Europe, and how his "prophecy" made in 1939 about a world war resulting in the destruction of European Jewry was coming true.

    Nazis were bad because they committed the holocaust, not because they denied it. (See above, it's even questionable how much they actually denied it.) Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad, and because he also worships Hitler, resolves the contradiction by denying the holocaust even happened.

    So holocaust-deniers are not that bad (at least not necessarily bad): presumably they wouldn't want to do something which they consider bad, so they wouldn't commit the holocaust, even if they worship Hitler. They are not really Nazis.

    Okay, they might lie about it just so that they have another shot at committing another holocaust, but since A) they have no chance of actually coming to power and B) they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler.

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad,

    I’ve seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn’t happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small. The only person who I’ve ever heard say that was George Lincoln Rockwell and that was decades ago. Most don’t make any moral judgment about it. Neonazis also make no bones of their hatred of jews and never provide any non final-solution style solutions. So what exactly is a reasonable person left to assume they want to do?

    And it all raises the question why someone would embrace nazism but only a nazism that goes completely contrary to the commonly conceptions of the ideology and events around World War II. Why bother? It’s enough work to bring people over to your side about the current state of the nation and what ought to be done for the future but embracing national socialism means you also have to spend time changing peoples view of history and conception of the nature of nazism. It’s completely irrational at face value and pretty obviously a kind of dog whistling (and possibly something else).

    they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    If what you said about the comments of the nazi leadership is true you would have to be a total idiot to deny the holocaust and idiots are bad. And they also tar by association the good goals with their idiocy, violence, and commitment to an ideology that the vast majority of people find abhorrent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    There probably is not a reliable empirical study to either support or refute this either way, but my general impression is that neo-nazis are a very small subset of the people who question the Holocaust narrative. You don't exactly have to be a nazi to realize that, if it's illegal in multiple countries to question the narrative, there's probably a lot of facts out there that the elites do not want to become widely known. Only liars fear open debate of their claims.

    And yes, there are people out there who seem comfortable with, if not openly supportive of, the idea of a Endlösung der Judenfrage, but one would be negligent if not malicious to not admit the broader context of a society where it is increasingly common to celebrate the ongoing Final Solution to the White (Goyim) Question.

    , @reiner Tor

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.
     
    Again, that's not the same as actual Nazis. He doesn't call himself Nazi (neo or original), so why lazily adapt the leftist smear-word? After skimming through the tradwoker program, National Socialist is used not in its 1933-45 Germany meaning, but simply as a national kind of socialism - i.e. something like Sweden with a strong nationalistic (instead of globalist/anti-white) ideological foundation. They want to nationalize a number of industries (but not nearly all of them, i.e. no communism), and they stand for freedom of expression (except for anti-whites, which makes them again quite similar to Sweden, except they'd change the ideology).

    So why use the lazy and incorrect leftist smear-word?

    I’ve seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn’t happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small.
     
    That's your assertion. I don't think it's true, not in my experience. For example Greg Johnson (Counter Currents Publishing) thinks the holocaust numbers might be exaggerated (I remember in a comment he wrote about how there was a Jewish hospital in Berlin in 1945, and how to square it with the fact the Germans were supposedly murdering Jews as policy - why would they only kill healthy Jews..?*), but he wrote in no uncertain terms that exterminating all Jews would be bad. Instead, he supports sending all Jews to Israel.

    Why bother?
     
    Don't embrace national socialism if that's not your thing. But don't join in the leftist lynch mob. Don't accept their limits to the discussion.

    You know, if "actual swastika-bearing Nazis" are allowed to be part of public discourse, than your views will look like normal, moderate views. Which I don't doubt they are. But if you allow the "real actual Nazis" to be banned from public discourse, then you'll now be the most extreme political position. This is uncomfortable on several levels. One is that you'll be accused of harboring secret Nazi sympathies (because if Nazism is illegal, then there must be people who are secret Nazis but to avoid prosecution will express the rightmost legal views, i.e. your views). Another is that limiting public discourse will never stop to your right. They will eventually come after you (heck, that's what they're doing already) after (or even before) they finished their business banning "real actual Nazis".

    You must've heard the "first they came for the communists..." quote. Actually, the communists in that quote were actual Stalinists (in 1933, when they came for them), with goals to establish totalitarian government. But Niemöller felt that he should've spoken out when "they came for the communists". Now they're coming for the "neo-Nazis". You should understand why that's a bad thing.



    *I could answer Greg's question, but that's not point here, the point is that he's doubting the holocaust as such. My answer to Greg would be that there were different categories of Jews, and some, like half-Jews with 50% German ancestry, or Jews with German spouses, were more difficult to remove due to the adverse effects it might've had (or so Hitler&Co. feared) on the German populace. So they decided to
    , @Bill

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.
     
    You reason like a libertarian. Nazis are bad because they fought a big war in order to murder or enslave millions of people. They are not bad because they claimed to favor nationalizing some industries and upholding moral sanity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. eah says:

    Finally, hopefully more Whites will ‘put 2 and 2 together’ and realize things will be much worse when Whites are a minority in America — the ’2 and 2′ being 1) stubborn discrepancies in economic well-being across racial/ethnic lines in even the ‘most diverse’ locales’, which due to HBD are irremediable without extensive government intervention (taxation, wealth redistribution/transfers), and will always be blamed on Whites (racism, including ‘institutional racism’, ‘white privilege’ etc), and 2) the implacable hatred and hysterical condemnation of any form of white identity, as evidenced by the response to this article.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  147. dr kill says:
    @Eagle Eye

    We assigned Richard Fausset, one of our smartest thinkers and best writers
     
    NYT complimenting its own writer has an air of anticipatory defensiveness.

    Would the NYT call one of its "privileged" white male writer "one of our smartest thinkers and best writers"?

    Does anyone know where this Fausset fellow ranks on the NYT-Krugman scale of ‘smart thinkers and bestest writers’? His bio shows the classical bi-coastal employment pattern of the successful , Proggy writer, his previous work is all highly slanted, how can he be taking so much stick? Life is really confusing me these days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Daniel H
    Clearest expression yet why the NY Times is doomed as a business and will only exist as a charity in the future. They have forgotten (or maybe, for decades, haven't even known) what business they are in. They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion. The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, "Pinch" Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers. Everything else is beside the point. A circle-jerk of virtue signaling white SJW readers is not valuable enough for your paying customers to continue to do so.

    The Guardian only exists as a Charity ( OK, Trust, more or less same thing ) and has done for years. It continually solicites donations from its readers, even though its editor is a multi-millionaire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. dr kill says:
    @Stan Adams
    For years and years and years, my ritual has been to buy the Thanksgiving edition of the Miami Herald - the thickest paper of the year - and go through all the Black Friday ads. It's a tribute to the Great American Orgy of Naked Consumerism.

    On Thursday, I tried to buy a copy of the English Herald, with absolutely no success. I couldn't find a single copy for sale at any of the places where I looked - two CVSes, two Walgreenses, three gas stations, two convenience stores. Publix (a ubiquitous supermarket chain) would have had it, but all of the company's innumerable locations were closed for the holiday. (As they should have been.)

    While driving around, I spotted a number of Herald vending machines, almost all of which were empty. (One or two of them had ruined papers from weeks ago in their display windows.) Finally, I located a vending machine that, miraculously, had a copy of the Thursday paper in the display window.

    The daily paper now costs $2*, but this edition had the weekend price of $3. (That fact was not mentioned on the price tag on the vending machine. I only noticed it when I looked through the window to verify the date of the edition.) Somehow I managed to scrounge together 12 quarters. It was only then that I discovered that the vending machine, rusted with age, was hopelessly jammed. (At least I got my money back. I had to press the Coin Return button several times, though.) So I was totally out of luck.

    I did pick up the Spanish edition of the paper for $2. It was pretty thick in its own right. A good number of the ads were bilingual, but still.

    I used to eat all the time at a restaurant at a hotel that always had big tall stacks of the Herald at the front desk, free for the taking. (This included the full Sunday paper, complete with all of the extras - the ads, the comics, the weekly TV guide, etc.) The manager told me that the hotel didn't even request them - they were dumped off as a matter of course, to boost circulation. There were always far more copies delivered than there were rooms at the hotel - and this was a decent-sized establishment.

    For years and years and years, I never felt the need to subscribe to the paper - any paper - because free copies were lying around all over the place. Even today, the better hotels have big stacks of unread Wall Street Journals and USA Todays in the lobby.

    Not so many years ago, there were cities where entire neighborhoods got free delivery of the paper seven days a week, courtesy of one local business or another.

    The circulation figures were absolute bullshit for many years. Advertisers got royally ripped off for at least a decade.

    *Ten years ago, the daily Herald cost 35 cents in Dade, and only a quarter in Broward. As late as 2005, the Broward edition of the Sunday paper cost only 50 cents.

    The Herald can’t collapse, what would Leonard Pitts do? Or David Neal, the world’s worst sports writer in a town where that bar is very high. I haven’t been back home for 15 years, hat ever did they do with the Herald building? We used to park there for the Orange Bowl Parade.
    I had to recently call the Palm Beach Post circulation office, to have them stop littering my drive with their Sunday effort.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    The old Herald building was demolished in 2013, around the time of its fiftieth birthday.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/wwaem4/picture12318008/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/01HERALDBUILDING_CPJ.JPG

    McClatchy (the company that bought Knight-Ridder in 2006) moved the operation to Doral, not far from the airport. The Herald signed a 15-year lease for the building that used to house the headquarters of the U.S. Southern Command.

    The bayfront site is an empty lot now. Next month, it is going to be used as the headquarters for "Art Miami" during the Art Basel festival.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/visual-arts/art-basel/4of5io/picture118042113/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/SITEPLAN-112916B

    When Genting - the current owner of the property - bought the site, it wanted to build a hotel/casino on the water, but was stymied by the Florida Legislature.

    The hulk of the old Omni shopping mall, a few blocks to the north, is still mostly vacant. There are various plans for that area. I'm not sure where things stand at the moment.

    The old Art Deco Sears tower on Biscayne is now part of the Adrienne Arsht Center performing-arts complex. An acquaintance of mine volunteers there several times a month. It's the only way she can afford to get her high-culture fix.

    The downtown area is unrecognizable from how it was 15 years ago. So many shiny new buildings, all eagerly awaiting the arrival of a Category 5 hurricane.

    There are plans to build a 92-story condo tower on the site of One Bayfront Plaza (a 1959 building on Biscayne between SE 1st and 2nd Streets). This tower would dwarf its neighbors - the Southeast Financial Center (SFC - the tallest building in Miami from 1983 to 2003) and One Biscayne Tower (OBT).

    OBT was the tallest building south of Atlanta upon its completion in 1974. (It had a 15% occupancy rate. The original developer went bankrupt.) It looks positively tiny these days.

    In this 1982 shot, OBT is the tallest building (the one with the antenna on the roof). OBP is the smaller building directly to the left of OBT. The building under construction to the left of OBP is the SFC:
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/miami17/edballbldg1982miamistallest.jpg

    The same general area in 2014:
    http://www.orlandotomiamishuttle.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/3-13-14-Miami-Skyline.jpg

    A rendering of the planned 92-story building:
    https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/2BMkXOkrvygU1fKORNiXoQrrcY4=/0x0:3255x2008/1200x800/filters:focal(1021x1056:1541x1576)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/53411229/u6pFnSl.0.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. dr kill says:
    @Svigor

    White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.”
     
    Is it "ass-white"? Is that some kind of code? A way of saying that Whites are as white as their own asses? Can we get a ruling on this?

    ***

    I love Ohio Nazis. (Actually, around here I suppose I can admit that I don't like Nazis. It's a practical thing, not an ideological thing; Nazis are mostly rigid, tone-deaf, assholes who seem more about LARPing than anything related to the real world.)

    The genesis of the story was the aftermath of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August, the terrifying Ku Klux Klan-like images of young white men carrying tiki torches and shouting “Jews will not replace us,” and the subsequent violence that included the killing of a woman, Heather D. Heyer.
     
    From what I gather, it was "you will not replace us," and NYT is lying about the "Jew" part. It would make sense; it's not like pro-whites are dying to be replace, as long as Jews aren't doing it.

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish? Because last I heard, he had no ties to anyone in the movement, previous to showing up in Charlotte. In any event, it seems likely Fields is gonna beat that rap.

    beginning for his life
     
    Proofreading seems to be a lost art.

    Is this another one of those silly ‘where is the hyphen’ games invented by Saint Trayvon? Creepy ass cracker? Normal ass white people? Where is Rachael Jenteal when needed?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. AndrewR says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler.

    He's a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad,

    I've seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn't happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small. The only person who I've ever heard say that was George Lincoln Rockwell and that was decades ago. Most don't make any moral judgment about it. Neonazis also make no bones of their hatred of jews and never provide any non final-solution style solutions. So what exactly is a reasonable person left to assume they want to do?

    And it all raises the question why someone would embrace nazism but only a nazism that goes completely contrary to the commonly conceptions of the ideology and events around World War II. Why bother? It's enough work to bring people over to your side about the current state of the nation and what ought to be done for the future but embracing national socialism means you also have to spend time changing peoples view of history and conception of the nature of nazism. It's completely irrational at face value and pretty obviously a kind of dog whistling (and possibly something else).

    they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    If what you said about the comments of the nazi leadership is true you would have to be a total idiot to deny the holocaust and idiots are bad. And they also tar by association the good goals with their idiocy, violence, and commitment to an ideology that the vast majority of people find abhorrent.

    There probably is not a reliable empirical study to either support or refute this either way, but my general impression is that neo-nazis are a very small subset of the people who question the Holocaust narrative. You don’t exactly have to be a nazi to realize that, if it’s illegal in multiple countries to question the narrative, there’s probably a lot of facts out there that the elites do not want to become widely known. Only liars fear open debate of their claims.

    And yes, there are people out there who seem comfortable with, if not openly supportive of, the idea of a Endlösung der Judenfrage, but one would be negligent if not malicious to not admit the broader context of a society where it is increasingly common to celebrate the ongoing Final Solution to the White (Goyim) Question.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Curle says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    According to Fermi’s third theorem of inherent nastiness and ignorance? Or do you perhaps refer to a more subjective measure?

    I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know if you mean Fermi or Fermat but why don't you look up the biography of Enrico Fermi and get back to me.

    The guy is a neo nazi. The article doesn't ever take him for task and get at why he likes national socialism and nazi germany so much. There is something inherently nasty, gorish, and ignorant about neo nazism given the realities of history and the article almost totally ignores those dimensions of his ideology.

    It's a genuinely bad article that actually deserves the condemnation it's getting.

    “The article doesn’t ever take him for task and get at why he likes national socialism and nazi germany so much.”

    Because that’s the job of a reporter, to selectively take people to task for their opinions? Want to provide an example where Bolshevik sympathizers are taken to task for associating with a group that starved up to 7 million Ukrainians as a cheap way of murdering them? When’s the last time you took one of those hammer and sickle or Che Guavara tee-shirt wearing people to task? Perhaps that should be part of upcoming reporting on the Antifa?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Jack D says:
    @Opinionator
    Doesn't murder require the intent to kill?

    One type of murder is called “depraved heart” murder – even though you don’t specifically intend to kill, you act with extreme indifference to human life. The classic example is firing a gun into a crowd of strangers. You have no specific intention to kill anyone but if someone dies then you are still guilty of murder. Driving a car into a crowd would also qualify.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Steve Sailer
    If someone crashes a car into another car which hits me and I have a heart attack and die, I want my estate to sue.

    I’m sure you would. So would I.

    But then, I doubt you would have been standing in the street and unlawfully blocking traffic in the first place, so it seems a lot less likely that that would happen to you.

    I guess having your estate sue someone is nice, but I prefer the option of trying to avoid getting hit by a car in the first place.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. bomag says:
    @Forbes
    Must be a Tiny Dick impostor.

    Anything coherent from this troll is a cut and paste.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Jack D says:
    @newrouter
    "If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. "

    So the driver did a "three bank shot" on fatso Heather. Good Allan you are amusing.

    Fields won’t be amused when they sentence him to life imprisonment for exactly this reason.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Thomas

    Sure, unless you can convince a judge or jury that you had a legitimate fear for your own safety, and the people you hit were blocking your way out of the situation.
     
    In that case, you're talking about a defense of necessity (which generally isn't recognized in homicide cases most of the time), not causation.

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened "but for" the defendant's action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable. And, generally, in both tort and criminal law, there is what they call the "eggshell skull" rule, that a defendant "takes the victim as they find them," meaning that even if there is some pre-existing physical or medical vulnerability on the part of the victim, the defendant will still be held responsible.

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable.

    It’s pretty bizarre and unusual for someone to be standing in the street and blocking traffic in the middle of a riot.

    Imagine you were running out of a burning building and, right after you got out the door, you ran into an old lady, knocked her over, and she hit her head on something and died.

    Are you liable? Sure, I suppose so. But you can still argue that you were just trying to get to safety, and you couldn’t help the fact that she was standing there and blocking your exit. It obviously wouldn’t be the same thing as you just taking it upon yourself to run into the old lady for no reason, on an uncrowded sidewalk or something.

    I mean, I can’t say for sure that Fields will be able to convince people of that. But it’s certainly possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    Again, in the hypothetical you mention (knocking someone over), causation would still not be an issue. Intent (mens rea) would be. I suppose Fields could try to argue that he accidentally or unintentionally drove into the crowd. Causation still would not be at issue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Jack D says:
    @Pericles

    Legally, if you set into motion a chain of event that leads to someone’s death, you are responsible even if you did not strike the person directly and even if other people might not have died from the same blow. Intentionally driving a car into a crowd is not cool and you do so at your own peril

     

    So if you're part of a mob attacking a car which then -- perhaps to escape or in confusion -- drives into a crowd, you're responsible?

    Fields’s defense will have the opportunity at his murder trial to introduce evidence that Fields was in fear for his life and merely attempting to flee and that he did not intentionally plow into the demonstrators. If the jury believes this bullshit from a Nazi, then he will get off or be found guilty of some lesser charge but I wouldn’t hold my breath.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    From what I've heard of the Charlottesville justice system, it's not like Justitia is blind or anything. No bets from me. Yet, even though the guy is whiter than Zimmerman and they have been going nuts about the event as a whole, we haven't heard much about the case from the media.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @Guy de Champlagne
    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler.

    He's a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad,

    I've seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn't happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small. The only person who I've ever heard say that was George Lincoln Rockwell and that was decades ago. Most don't make any moral judgment about it. Neonazis also make no bones of their hatred of jews and never provide any non final-solution style solutions. So what exactly is a reasonable person left to assume they want to do?

    And it all raises the question why someone would embrace nazism but only a nazism that goes completely contrary to the commonly conceptions of the ideology and events around World War II. Why bother? It's enough work to bring people over to your side about the current state of the nation and what ought to be done for the future but embracing national socialism means you also have to spend time changing peoples view of history and conception of the nature of nazism. It's completely irrational at face value and pretty obviously a kind of dog whistling (and possibly something else).

    they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    If what you said about the comments of the nazi leadership is true you would have to be a total idiot to deny the holocaust and idiots are bad. And they also tar by association the good goals with their idiocy, violence, and commitment to an ideology that the vast majority of people find abhorrent.

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    Again, that’s not the same as actual Nazis. He doesn’t call himself Nazi (neo or original), so why lazily adapt the leftist smear-word? After skimming through the tradwoker program, National Socialist is used not in its 1933-45 Germany meaning, but simply as a national kind of socialism – i.e. something like Sweden with a strong nationalistic (instead of globalist/anti-white) ideological foundation. They want to nationalize a number of industries (but not nearly all of them, i.e. no communism), and they stand for freedom of expression (except for anti-whites, which makes them again quite similar to Sweden, except they’d change the ideology).

    So why use the lazy and incorrect leftist smear-word?

    I’ve seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn’t happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small.

    That’s your assertion. I don’t think it’s true, not in my experience. For example Greg Johnson (Counter Currents Publishing) thinks the holocaust numbers might be exaggerated (I remember in a comment he wrote about how there was a Jewish hospital in Berlin in 1945, and how to square it with the fact the Germans were supposedly murdering Jews as policy – why would they only kill healthy Jews..?*), but he wrote in no uncertain terms that exterminating all Jews would be bad. Instead, he supports sending all Jews to Israel.

    Why bother?

    Don’t embrace national socialism if that’s not your thing. But don’t join in the leftist lynch mob. Don’t accept their limits to the discussion.

    You know, if “actual swastika-bearing Nazis” are allowed to be part of public discourse, than your views will look like normal, moderate views. Which I don’t doubt they are. But if you allow the “real actual Nazis” to be banned from public discourse, then you’ll now be the most extreme political position. This is uncomfortable on several levels. One is that you’ll be accused of harboring secret Nazi sympathies (because if Nazism is illegal, then there must be people who are secret Nazis but to avoid prosecution will express the rightmost legal views, i.e. your views). Another is that limiting public discourse will never stop to your right. They will eventually come after you (heck, that’s what they’re doing already) after (or even before) they finished their business banning “real actual Nazis”.

    You must’ve heard the “first they came for the communists…” quote. Actually, the communists in that quote were actual Stalinists (in 1933, when they came for them), with goals to establish totalitarian government. But Niemöller felt that he should’ve spoken out when “they came for the communists”. Now they’re coming for the “neo-Nazis”. You should understand why that’s a bad thing.

    [MORE]

    *I could answer Greg’s question, but that’s not point here, the point is that he’s doubting the holocaust as such. My answer to Greg would be that there were different categories of Jews, and some, like half-Jews with 50% German ancestry, or Jews with German spouses, were more difficult to remove due to the adverse effects it might’ve had (or so Hitler&Co. feared) on the German populace. So they decided to

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles

    After skimming through the tradwoker program, National Socialist is used not in its 1933-45 Germany meaning, but simply as a national kind of socialism – i.e. something like Sweden with a strong nationalistic (instead of globalist/anti-white) ideological foundation.

     

    A Swedish journalist a few years ago wrote a weekend article on the history of ideologies in Sweden and haplessly managed to put in 'nationalistic socialism' as one strain. I chuckled to myself and, what do you know, the very next day they printed a reasonably prominent apology to Swedish socialists everywhere. We must never forget.
    , @anon
    I never said anyone should be banned. I said that an article writing about a neo Nazi sympathetically shouldn't cheat by completely eliding the worst parts of his ideology. Show him as a kind, thoughtful, considerate, and whatever person (as longs it's accurate) but also give people a more comprehensive view of what neonazism actually is. That's a noble worthwhile article to write.

    I think you're being completely naïve. You could embrace everything that you see as positive in their platform not just without embracing Nazi terminology and iconography but by actually specifically denouncing it. Occams razor says that it's a dog whistle.

    And the idea that Hitler was any kind of a model of socialisism, or even a benefactor of the white race, is laughable. He enriched his crony friends and started wars that killed millions of his own people (and millions upon millions of other white people). It's just completely ridiculous that anyone interested in anything other than a) trolling or b) near genocidal or worse policies against jews would embrace him.

    To quote George Orwell

    The British ruling class were not altogether wrong in thinking that Fascism was on their side. It is a fact that any rich man, unless he is a Jew, has less to fear from Fascism than from either Communism or democratic Socialism. One ought never to forget this, for nearly the whole of German and Italian propaganda is designed to cover it up.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @Svigor

    White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.”
     
    Is it "ass-white"? Is that some kind of code? A way of saying that Whites are as white as their own asses? Can we get a ruling on this?

    ***

    I love Ohio Nazis. (Actually, around here I suppose I can admit that I don't like Nazis. It's a practical thing, not an ideological thing; Nazis are mostly rigid, tone-deaf, assholes who seem more about LARPing than anything related to the real world.)

    The genesis of the story was the aftermath of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August, the terrifying Ku Klux Klan-like images of young white men carrying tiki torches and shouting “Jews will not replace us,” and the subsequent violence that included the killing of a woman, Heather D. Heyer.
     
    From what I gather, it was "you will not replace us," and NYT is lying about the "Jew" part. It would make sense; it's not like pro-whites are dying to be replace, as long as Jews aren't doing it.

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish? Because last I heard, he had no ties to anyone in the movement, previous to showing up in Charlotte. In any event, it seems likely Fields is gonna beat that rap.

    beginning for his life
     
    Proofreading seems to be a lost art.

    around here I suppose I can admit that I don’t like Nazis.

    Coming out: I don’t like Nazis much either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. I guess I am the only one left here who has noticed how circumspect Sailer is when he talks about …a certain type of politics…looks like he is preparing to cash in with a nice gig with some semi-mainstream outfit…
    no one else?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  162. Bill says:
    @Daniel H
    Clearest expression yet why the NY Times is doomed as a business and will only exist as a charity in the future. They have forgotten (or maybe, for decades, haven't even known) what business they are in. They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion. The Times believes that readers, only morally correct SJW readers, mind you, are their customers. Wrong. Hello, "Pinch" Schulzberger, you are in the business of implement advertising campaigns for your PAYING advertiser customers. Everything else is beside the point. A circle-jerk of virtue signaling white SJW readers is not valuable enough for your paying customers to continue to do so.

    They believe that they are in the business of moral affirmation and suasion.

    That’s the business they are in. If they stop producing this type of output, they will either be taken over or replaced.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. I guess I am the only one left here who has noticed how circumspect Sailer is when he talks about …a certain type of politics…looks like he is preparing to cash in with a nice gig with some semi-mainstream outfit…
    no one else noticed it?
    hmmmm….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  164. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    Like many women, Heather appears to have changed her weight (and hair color) over time (and not for the better) but even in her "fat" pictures she is plump but not morbidly obese.

    even in her “fat” pictures she is plump but not morbidly obese.

    I think you’re using a definition of “pleasantly plump” that is very different from the one everyone else uses. When I think of “pleasantly plump”, I think of the wife on some sitcom or something. Heather Heyer was obviously far more than 30 pounds overweight, and it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if she was more than 100 pounds over her ideal weight, which would make her “morbidly obese” by definition.

    I don’t know why you would do this, although I would suspect dishonesty has something to do with it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. Bill says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    Would you consider all of these ideas "reasonable"? https://www.tradworker.org/points/

    Is there any doubt the author could have totally crucified this guy in the eyes of the readers by focusing on the right components of his ideology.

    Yes, they are reasonable. They might not be right, and I certainly don’t agree with all of them, but they are reasonable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Jack D
    Like many women, Heather appears to have changed her weight (and hair color) over time (and not for the better) but even in her "fat" pictures she is plump but not morbidly obese.

    The article by “Marcus Cicero” [sic - our writer apparently did not realize that Tullius is not equivalent to a modern-day American middle name] that was posted here included pictures of a genuinely fat woman who does not look like very much like Heyer. Cicero seemed to recognize that it was a different woman but filled his piece with obfuscating prose designed to conceal that fact.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. National Review, Steve Sailer is ready for your offer!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  168. Bill says:
    @JerryC

    The MJ reporter is saying that white supremacists are just normal white people and that leftists don’t understand that – if Steve said this most people here would agree enthusiastically, but because MJ is a leftist rag you won’t permit yourself to agree with the guy even if he is saying the exact same thing.
     
    Seems pretty clear to me the guy intended to imply that "normal ass white people" are by definition evil white supremacists. And have been since 1776 (only since 1776?). So no one should be surprised when one of them is outed as diabolical crypto-nazi.

    Seems pretty clear to me the guy intended to imply that “normal ass white people” are by definition evil white supremacists.

    But what are you objecting to? Don’t normal people wish to be ruled by their co-ethnics? Are you suggesting that wishing to be ruled by your co-ethnics is abnormal?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Bill says:
    @Thomas
    I've met Bauer personally. He majored in Development Studies at UC Berkeley, and is still based out of Berkeley professionally. (Funny enough, that particular major has seen more than one alum that I know of wind up in similar trouble overseas). Pretty much came across to me as standard-issue crunchy white hippy, gauged ears and everything, and I wouldn't disagree with your characterization. I don't think one lands in for months in an Iranian jail without being rather naive.

    Working for the CIA?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. @Amigo
    Heather Heyer died of a heart attack, brought on because she was an very obese chain smoker. I never came across a video showing her actually getting hit (maybe the car hit her on the leg). Had she been a normal sized person who didn't smoke she would have just been another witness to the whole mess.

    If your actions cause a bystander to have a heart attack, depending on state law, you can be charged with their death.

    Her poor health is not a defense, look up the eggshell doctrine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The True and Original David
    What if the eggshell is part of a mob unlawfully blocking the street, smashing the windows of occupied vehicles, and threatening the trapped drivers with imminent bodily harm? Is there a doctrine for that, Mr. Dershowitz?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. AndrewR says:
    @Cagey Beast
    OT:
    I was just reading about the Greek Colonel's regime of the late 1960s and early '70s when I saw a phrase I liked: "Ethnosotirios Epanastasis" or "revolution to save the nation". I made me think ethno-soteriology could be a field of study that dealt with the art and science of national salvation. Maybe Stephen Miller should call himself Trump's senior ethno-soteriologist?

    He should call himself Trump’s chief low-T scrawny balding cuck tribesman.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Jack D says:
    @Stan Adams
    For years and years and years, my ritual has been to buy the Thanksgiving edition of the Miami Herald - the thickest paper of the year - and go through all the Black Friday ads. It's a tribute to the Great American Orgy of Naked Consumerism.

    On Thursday, I tried to buy a copy of the English Herald, with absolutely no success. I couldn't find a single copy for sale at any of the places where I looked - two CVSes, two Walgreenses, three gas stations, two convenience stores. Publix (a ubiquitous supermarket chain) would have had it, but all of the company's innumerable locations were closed for the holiday. (As they should have been.)

    While driving around, I spotted a number of Herald vending machines, almost all of which were empty. (One or two of them had ruined papers from weeks ago in their display windows.) Finally, I located a vending machine that, miraculously, had a copy of the Thursday paper in the display window.

    The daily paper now costs $2*, but this edition had the weekend price of $3. (That fact was not mentioned on the price tag on the vending machine. I only noticed it when I looked through the window to verify the date of the edition.) Somehow I managed to scrounge together 12 quarters. It was only then that I discovered that the vending machine, rusted with age, was hopelessly jammed. (At least I got my money back. I had to press the Coin Return button several times, though.) So I was totally out of luck.

    I did pick up the Spanish edition of the paper for $2. It was pretty thick in its own right. A good number of the ads were bilingual, but still.

    I used to eat all the time at a restaurant at a hotel that always had big tall stacks of the Herald at the front desk, free for the taking. (This included the full Sunday paper, complete with all of the extras - the ads, the comics, the weekly TV guide, etc.) The manager told me that the hotel didn't even request them - they were dumped off as a matter of course, to boost circulation. There were always far more copies delivered than there were rooms at the hotel - and this was a decent-sized establishment.

    For years and years and years, I never felt the need to subscribe to the paper - any paper - because free copies were lying around all over the place. Even today, the better hotels have big stacks of unread Wall Street Journals and USA Todays in the lobby.

    Not so many years ago, there were cities where entire neighborhoods got free delivery of the paper seven days a week, courtesy of one local business or another.

    The circulation figures were absolute bullshit for many years. Advertisers got royally ripped off for at least a decade.

    *Ten years ago, the daily Herald cost 35 cents in Dade, and only a quarter in Broward. As late as 2005, the Broward edition of the Sunday paper cost only 50 cents.

    For a long time, the chief source of revenue for newspapers was ads and ad rates were based on circulation, so they kept the cover price low to encourage circulation. But as ad revenues have fallen off, they have raised the cover price considerably. The papers are now down to such a small hard core of dedicated print readers that they find that these remaining readers are not price sensitive – another quarter or 50 cents is not enough to get them to break their newspaper habit. You see this in a lot of cities (at least those that still have printed daily papers).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Pericles says:
    @Jack D
    Fields's defense will have the opportunity at his murder trial to introduce evidence that Fields was in fear for his life and merely attempting to flee and that he did not intentionally plow into the demonstrators. If the jury believes this bullshit from a Nazi, then he will get off or be found guilty of some lesser charge but I wouldn't hold my breath.

    From what I’ve heard of the Charlottesville justice system, it’s not like Justitia is blind or anything. No bets from me. Yet, even though the guy is whiter than Zimmerman and they have been going nuts about the event as a whole, we haven’t heard much about the case from the media.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. slumber_j says:
    @jorge videla (BGI volunteer)
    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holocaust&year_start=1800&year_end=2010&corpus=0&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolocaust%3B%2Cc0

    I would guess that “Holocaust” in the sense of the wholesale murder of Jews by the Nazis only really got going with the 1978 TV miniseries of that name. I certainly hadn’t heard the expression used that way before then.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Wouldn't it be great if , instead of blind guessing, there was some analytical tool where we could use actual data to shed light on such questions?

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holocaust&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolocaust%3B%2Cc0

    2001 was "peak Holocaust".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @Dr. X

    Shane Bauer, a senior reporter at Mother Jones and a winner of the National Magazine Award, tweeted: “People mad about this article want to believe that Nazis are monsters we cannot relate to. White supremacists are normal ass white people...
     
    This is true, but the meaning that one takes from this statement, and the context, is what's important.

    How is this a true statement? Well, from the founding of this nation until 1965 or so, "normal ass white people" pretty much universally believed the following:

    1. America is a white nation built by and for white people
    2. Homosexuals are mentally ill
    3. Transgenders are even more mentally ill
    4. The role of woman is to "stand by her man" and raise his children
    5. Homosexuals, transgenders, and women don't belong in the military
    6. Communism is bad
    7. If a white man got his ass out of bed in the morning and put in an honest day's work, he could not only support his family, but get ahead in life.

    Today, if you believe #1-6 you are seen literally as a "Nazi" (and #7 is no longer true). Today you are seen as a Nazi because the culture has become inverted 180 degrees; women, gays, blacks, illegals and transgenders are holy and pure, and the white man is a satanic demon.

    So whether or not the white man is an actual Nazi or not he might as well be one, because 1) the ruling caste is going to call him one anyway, and 2) the "Nazis" in Germany were a working class movement (which, admittedly, got out of hand due to the fanatical leadership) but in fact they pretty much agreed with "all of the above," as did normal Americans for the first 180-190 years of our existence.

    That would be “normal ass Americans”, don’tcha know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Bill says:
    @Guy de Champlagne
    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler.

    He's a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad,

    I've seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn't happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small. The only person who I've ever heard say that was George Lincoln Rockwell and that was decades ago. Most don't make any moral judgment about it. Neonazis also make no bones of their hatred of jews and never provide any non final-solution style solutions. So what exactly is a reasonable person left to assume they want to do?

    And it all raises the question why someone would embrace nazism but only a nazism that goes completely contrary to the commonly conceptions of the ideology and events around World War II. Why bother? It's enough work to bring people over to your side about the current state of the nation and what ought to be done for the future but embracing national socialism means you also have to spend time changing peoples view of history and conception of the nature of nazism. It's completely irrational at face value and pretty obviously a kind of dog whistling (and possibly something else).

    they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    If what you said about the comments of the nazi leadership is true you would have to be a total idiot to deny the holocaust and idiots are bad. And they also tar by association the good goals with their idiocy, violence, and commitment to an ideology that the vast majority of people find abhorrent.

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.

    You reason like a libertarian. Nazis are bad because they fought a big war in order to murder or enslave millions of people. They are not bad because they claimed to favor nationalizing some industries and upholding moral sanity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Jack D says:
    @Cloudbuster
    Only in the NYT can a party be avowedly socialist and still "extreme right wing."

    From the NYT article: "In 2015, he helped start the Traditionalist Worker Party, one of the extreme right-wing groups"

    From https://www.tradworker.org/points/ :

    "2. National Socialism

    Today’s global capitalist system is the enemy of all humanity and represents the greatest threat to the continued existence of our people. "

    Other points:
    "social justice,"
    "healthcare as a right,",
    "end to foreclosures on families with children and the elderly" (housing as a right),
    nationalization of key industries,
    anti-usury,
    mandatory paid maternity and paternity leave,
    pro-life,
    anti free trade,
    communist party governmental structure,
    only partial religious freedom (certain religions banned, no "wall of separation" between church and state),
    restricted immigration,
    cease interventionism,
    infrastructure spending,
    strong military,
    large tax breaks for married couples & children,
    end no-fault divorce,
    "right to work" (different than the union-related laws of the same name),
    strong social safety net,
    national workers' union,
    workers own share of company,
    limited freedom of speech (they guarantee "freedom of speech" but then list a host of restrictions, the "Yes, but..." method that really means "no freedom of speech"),
    right to keep and bear arms,
    state-imposed morality,
    death penalty for drug-trafficking,
    and so on.

    The party is insane. Adopting policy points from the modern "left" and "right" and outright Nazi, all in service to the sort of authoritarian national socialist state that is left wing in most respects -- resembling the People's Republic of China more than it represents any free nation.

    Sounds like a radical leftist party to me.

    These are the sorts of alt-righters I can't abide. When you see the authoritarianism and socialism dripping from their documents, you can practically smell the gulags. Like all revolutionaries, they think they're going to be the ones deciding who gets sent to the gulags or the guillotines.

    Only in the NYT can a party be avowedly socialist and still “extreme right wing.”

    The last time I looked, “National Socialist” included the word “Socialist”. This may be a hint that Nazi ideology involves elements of socialism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    And what, exactly, is "right wing" about socialism?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Pericles says:
    @reiner Tor

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.
     
    Again, that's not the same as actual Nazis. He doesn't call himself Nazi (neo or original), so why lazily adapt the leftist smear-word? After skimming through the tradwoker program, National Socialist is used not in its 1933-45 Germany meaning, but simply as a national kind of socialism - i.e. something like Sweden with a strong nationalistic (instead of globalist/anti-white) ideological foundation. They want to nationalize a number of industries (but not nearly all of them, i.e. no communism), and they stand for freedom of expression (except for anti-whites, which makes them again quite similar to Sweden, except they'd change the ideology).

    So why use the lazy and incorrect leftist smear-word?

    I’ve seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn’t happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small.
     
    That's your assertion. I don't think it's true, not in my experience. For example Greg Johnson (Counter Currents Publishing) thinks the holocaust numbers might be exaggerated (I remember in a comment he wrote about how there was a Jewish hospital in Berlin in 1945, and how to square it with the fact the Germans were supposedly murdering Jews as policy - why would they only kill healthy Jews..?*), but he wrote in no uncertain terms that exterminating all Jews would be bad. Instead, he supports sending all Jews to Israel.

    Why bother?
     
    Don't embrace national socialism if that's not your thing. But don't join in the leftist lynch mob. Don't accept their limits to the discussion.

    You know, if "actual swastika-bearing Nazis" are allowed to be part of public discourse, than your views will look like normal, moderate views. Which I don't doubt they are. But if you allow the "real actual Nazis" to be banned from public discourse, then you'll now be the most extreme political position. This is uncomfortable on several levels. One is that you'll be accused of harboring secret Nazi sympathies (because if Nazism is illegal, then there must be people who are secret Nazis but to avoid prosecution will express the rightmost legal views, i.e. your views). Another is that limiting public discourse will never stop to your right. They will eventually come after you (heck, that's what they're doing already) after (or even before) they finished their business banning "real actual Nazis".

    You must've heard the "first they came for the communists..." quote. Actually, the communists in that quote were actual Stalinists (in 1933, when they came for them), with goals to establish totalitarian government. But Niemöller felt that he should've spoken out when "they came for the communists". Now they're coming for the "neo-Nazis". You should understand why that's a bad thing.



    *I could answer Greg's question, but that's not point here, the point is that he's doubting the holocaust as such. My answer to Greg would be that there were different categories of Jews, and some, like half-Jews with 50% German ancestry, or Jews with German spouses, were more difficult to remove due to the adverse effects it might've had (or so Hitler&Co. feared) on the German populace. So they decided to

    After skimming through the tradwoker program, National Socialist is used not in its 1933-45 Germany meaning, but simply as a national kind of socialism – i.e. something like Sweden with a strong nationalistic (instead of globalist/anti-white) ideological foundation.

    A Swedish journalist a few years ago wrote a weekend article on the history of ideologies in Sweden and haplessly managed to put in ‘nationalistic socialism’ as one strain. I chuckled to myself and, what do you know, the very next day they printed a reasonably prominent apology to Swedish socialists everywhere. We must never forget.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Amigo says:
    @Jack D
    That's a ridiculous lie. The coroner's report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.

    http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/heather-heyer-s-cause-of-death-ruled-as-blunt-force/article_cf362edc-b2c6-11e7-bfa4-8749ed76aae2.html

    Did you do your own autopsy that you are able to conclude otherwise? She was a healthy 32 year old. She was on the "pleasantly plump" side but not morbidly obese. I have an aunt who has a similar body type - the woman is 97 years old and still kicking. Even if her overweight and smoking had caught up with her someday, she probably had at least another 30 years in her. Outrageous lies like this really don't help your cause.

    I get it, you like fat women. Normal people don’t.

    Here she is on a stretcher. This is not pleasantly plump:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    You're sure that's Heather Heyer? Because it doesn't look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.



    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don't you know that Heather's family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?
    , @Amasius
    Nein! She is zaftig!

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/zaftig
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Jack D says:
    @Svigor

    White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.”
     
    Is it "ass-white"? Is that some kind of code? A way of saying that Whites are as white as their own asses? Can we get a ruling on this?

    ***

    I love Ohio Nazis. (Actually, around here I suppose I can admit that I don't like Nazis. It's a practical thing, not an ideological thing; Nazis are mostly rigid, tone-deaf, assholes who seem more about LARPing than anything related to the real world.)

    The genesis of the story was the aftermath of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August, the terrifying Ku Klux Klan-like images of young white men carrying tiki torches and shouting “Jews will not replace us,” and the subsequent violence that included the killing of a woman, Heather D. Heyer.
     
    From what I gather, it was "you will not replace us," and NYT is lying about the "Jew" part. It would make sense; it's not like pro-whites are dying to be replace, as long as Jews aren't doing it.

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish? Because last I heard, he had no ties to anyone in the movement, previous to showing up in Charlotte. In any event, it seems likely Fields is gonna beat that rap.

    beginning for his life
     
    Proofreading seems to be a lost art.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-james-fields-jr-charlottesville-20170818-story.html

    Fields, while perhaps not tied to any organized movement, had amply expressed his Nazi sympathies before Charlottesville.

    If Fields gets off, it will be on the basis that he is nuts – he had a pre-existing history of schizophrenia. His maternal grandpa was also nuts, having killed himself and his wife in a murder suicide. (Fields’s mother, BTW, seems to have been cursed by the gods – in addition to losing her parents, her husband (Fields’s father) died in an auto accident and she herself is paralyzed due to a different auto accident). However, insanity defenses are not well liked by juries and even if you “win” you lose because instead of being locked up in a prison they lock you up in a mental institution.

    All those who are saying that it was self -defense, that he panicked, that he did not cause Heyer’s death, etc. – he’ll have a chance to raise these at trial but there are many accounts to the effect that he charged into the crowd from a side street and then backed away. Maybe if he can get 12 fellow Nazis on the jury they will buy this version of reality (hey, it worked for OJ) but otherwise, good luck.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Jack D says:
    @slumber_j
    I would guess that "Holocaust" in the sense of the wholesale murder of Jews by the Nazis only really got going with the 1978 TV miniseries of that name. I certainly hadn't heard the expression used that way before then.

    Wouldn’t it be great if , instead of blind guessing, there was some analytical tool where we could use actual data to shed light on such questions?

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holocaust&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolocaust%3B%2Cc0

    2001 was “peak Holocaust”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hail
    There are problems with the Ngram algorithm after year 2000 which is why it defaults to end at 2000 and refuses to even give data after 2008.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Hail says: • Website
    @Jack D
    Wouldn't it be great if , instead of blind guessing, there was some analytical tool where we could use actual data to shed light on such questions?

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holocaust&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolocaust%3B%2Cc0

    2001 was "peak Holocaust".

    There are problems with the Ngram algorithm after year 2000 which is why it defaults to end at 2000 and refuses to even give data after 2008.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I think Ngram works fine through 2007, but not through 2008, when they must have stopped collecting data partway through the year. You have to turn off the smoothing by setting it to zero.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Jack D

    Only in the NYT can a party be avowedly socialist and still “extreme right wing.”
     
    The last time I looked, "National Socialist" included the word "Socialist". This may be a hint that Nazi ideology involves elements of socialism.

    And what, exactly, is “right wing” about socialism?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @Opinionator
    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the "cause" of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a "but for" sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of "ultimate" cause?

    How much societal pressure was there pointing this coroner in the direction of a "blunt force trauma" conclusion?

    Chicago, unsurprisingly, is pretty famous for coroners making shit up to keep the homicide rate down.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Dan Hayes
    Cloudbuster:

    You see authoritarianism and socialism "dripping" from their [Traditionalist Worker Party] documents.

    I, on the contrary, see many Distributism elements. Some of which were forwarded by G K Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, amongst others.

    Yes, I see that, but I’d argue that Distributism despite its support for private property would devolve in actual practice into fairly standard authoritarian socialism.

    There are planks in the TradWorkers party points that I have absolutely no problem with, but overall, it’s an extremely authoritarian document.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. @eah
    If you punch a man who, for what ever reason, has a paper thin skull and he dies, you will be charged with his death.

    She wasn't struck by the car -- the media has consistently promoted the lie that she died because she was hit by the car, which is not true -- this is basically what I wrote, and is basically what the NYT is doing: anyone reading this will assume Heyer died of traumatic injuries after being struck by the car ("killing") -- not to mention that it's a completely irrelevant/unrelated smear aimed at Hovater -- there was absolutely no reason to mention that incident here.

    There are cases from Wisconsin, Louisiana, and Maine in the past 5 years where a bystander died of a heart attack and the person who perpetrated the act which lead to the death was charged.

    Men facing murder charges after robbery bystander suffers heart attack

    One suspect refused to call an ambulance and continued to snatch money while Kneubuehl suffered the medical emergency, according to court documents...Kneubuehl had a history of heart problems, according to his crew members.

    Zimmerman was also "charged" with murder -- being charged is not the same as being convicted -- by that same, err, (legal) logic, the Alt-Right people who organized the rally could also be charged with the helicopter deaths, since otherwise it would not have been flying -- which would be absurd -- as Fields being charged with or convicted of Heyer's death would be.

    Fields should request a change of venue, maybe all the way to CA, where deliberately infecting someone with HIV is no longer a felony.

    Lastly, look up the definition of 'straw man' -- I don't think the description fits here.

    Your constant waving the flag about the victim’s health is a straw man to take the attention away from the fact that the only thing that matters in this case is how culpable the driver was for running into the crowd. Her poor health will not mitigate his guilt if he is found at fault.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    how culpable the driver was for running into the crowd

    I can answer that for you: not culpable at all -- so far I provided three examples of people who were seriously injured or killed after either leaving or being forcibly removed from their vehicles in similar threatening situations (I could no doubt find more) -- so in essence you seem to be saying/implying that a driver caught like that cannot simply use the vehicle to escape -- because doing so might cause someone nearby to have a heart attack and die -- I mean, you never know, right? -- best to sit there and accept your fate.

    "LOL"

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. Jack D says:
    @reiner Tor
    We shouldn't be lazy and accept the leftist Narrative, especially not if it's glaringly stupid.

    I think that holocaust-deniers are not really Nazis, even if they worship Hitler. You know, actual Nazis didn't deny the holocaust, they condoned it. While the actual methods of the holocaust were (badly guarded) state secrets, Hitler didn't really deny the holocaust, he frequently and openly talked in his speeches about how Jewry was disappearing from Europe, and how his "prophecy" made in 1939 about a world war resulting in the destruction of European Jewry was coming true.

    Nazis were bad because they committed the holocaust, not because they denied it. (See above, it's even questionable how much they actually denied it.) Someone who denies the holocaust thinks that the holocaust was (or would have been) bad, and because he also worships Hitler, resolves the contradiction by denying the holocaust even happened.

    So holocaust-deniers are not that bad (at least not necessarily bad): presumably they wouldn't want to do something which they consider bad, so they wouldn't commit the holocaust, even if they worship Hitler. They are not really Nazis.

    Okay, they might lie about it just so that they have another shot at committing another holocaust, but since A) they have no chance of actually coming to power and B) they are largely fighting for good goals (like reducing immigration), why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

    Holocaust deniers deny the Holocaust for the same reason that Muslims deny that 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslims – shame. Holocaust deniers either believe that perpetrating a Holocaust would be shameful or else perceive that the world regards it as shameful, but either way it is a stain on “their team”. The easiest way to get rid of this shame/stain is to say “it didn’t happen”. If it never happened, there is nothing to be ashamed about. We are seeing the same thing with Fields – it didn’t happen, he never rammed his car into a crowd, so WN’s have nothing to be ashamed about.

    We don’t come from a shame/face culture so these kind of denials in the face of clear evidence are not that common in our culture. But in shame cultures they happen all the time. People will do stuff right in front of your face and when you catch them they or their family will deny that the event even happened. You can show them video and they will still deny it. To someone from a Western culture it seems nuts but that’s how the human brain works sometimes – psychological defense mechanism can be very powerful, more powerful than reality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    My point was that holocaust deniers think that the holocaust was bad, and so are quite possibly different from actual real Nazis in that important aspect. They usually also deny Nazi mass murder of gentiles (mostly Slavs), and the Nazi culpability for starting the war. You seem to be in agreement with me: these guys are ashamed of their idol doing these things and so probably wouldn’t do such a shameful thing. (I recognize some of them might only lie about it to have chance to repeat all this, but we’re unlikely to find it out since they have exactly zero chance of coming to power.)

    Now these are the things (holocaust, mass murder of gentiles, starting the war) which make us so horrified when thinking about Nazis. A “Nazi” who doesn’t call himself a Nazi and rejects all three of these is actually not a Nazi: it’s a smear to call him “Nazi”. Because “Nazi” simply means something like “mass murderous war criminal”, and if he’s neither mass murderous nor a war criminal, then on what basis can you call him that?
    , @anon

    The easiest way to get rid of this shame/stain is to say “it didn’t happen”. If it never happened, there is nothing to be ashamed about. We are seeing the same thing with Fields – it didn’t happen, he never rammed his car into a crowd, so WN’s have nothing to be ashamed about.
     
    Actually the easiest way is to not embrace national socialism and dress up like a Nazi (or as much as a Nazi as you ignorantly think you can get away with without anyone noticing).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @Svigor

    White supremacists are normal ass white people and it’s been that way in America since 1776. We will continue to be in trouble till we understand that.”
     
    Is it "ass-white"? Is that some kind of code? A way of saying that Whites are as white as their own asses? Can we get a ruling on this?

    ***

    I love Ohio Nazis. (Actually, around here I suppose I can admit that I don't like Nazis. It's a practical thing, not an ideological thing; Nazis are mostly rigid, tone-deaf, assholes who seem more about LARPing than anything related to the real world.)

    The genesis of the story was the aftermath of the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., in August, the terrifying Ku Klux Klan-like images of young white men carrying tiki torches and shouting “Jews will not replace us,” and the subsequent violence that included the killing of a woman, Heather D. Heyer.
     
    From what I gather, it was "you will not replace us," and NYT is lying about the "Jew" part. It would make sense; it's not like pro-whites are dying to be replace, as long as Jews aren't doing it.

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish? Because last I heard, he had no ties to anyone in the movement, previous to showing up in Charlotte. In any event, it seems likely Fields is gonna beat that rap.

    beginning for his life
     
    Proofreading seems to be a lost art.

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish?

    His mom’s named Bloom, and I’ve never head of a gentile named Bloom. His name is Fields, and the only Fields I’ve ever known is Jewish, but who knows about this guy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Aside from the fact that Jewish Nazis are not very common, his name is James Fields, Jr. - Ashkenazi Jews don't typically name their children after their fathers. Kenton, Kentucky is not a hotbed of Hebrews. Bloom (Anglicized from Blum) is often a Jewish surname but it is also a fairly common British (non-Jewish) surname. Likewise Fields (often Anglicized from Feld). $10.50/ hr security guard is not on the top 10 list of Jewish occupations, etc.

    I know some alt-right types like to groundlessly accuse all sorts of non-Jewish people (e.g. George Zimmerman) of being ((( Jewish))) but this is really a big stretch. If he was a Jewish anti-Semite he was a very, very confused guy like the blind black white-supremacist in the Chapelle sketch:

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3a3f0f
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. NOTA says:
    @Random Dude on the Internet
    Hovater isn't alone: Saint Michael of Ferguson and Baby TrayTray were serious redpill events that pushed a lot of people into considering the tenets of the alt right. If you ask many alt right people what their turning point was, a lot of them will point to these incidents. They were big enough events to where I'd say without them, Trump wouldn't have been elected. We'd either have Hillary or some loser like Jeb or Marco instead.

    Those stories were quite harmful to the power of the msm to define the narrative, because the msm stories on both were so obviously bad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Jack Hanson
    Getting someone back from commotio cortis via defibrillation is easy, relatively speaking. The danger is when people are standing around the Little League short stop for ten minutes trying to figure out how a ball hitting Jimmy in the chest knocked him out. At that point you're bringing back a vegetable.

    Vegetable Jimmy Memorial Ball Field

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @eah
    https://twitter.com/mikeenochsback/status/934881218771980288

    I just spotted an extremely interesting tweet from a normie account in reply to that one you posted from Enoch. The tweeter was:

    Current Affairs is a magazine that publishes bi-monthly in print and online. It was started by Nathan J. Robinson, a PhD student at Harvard University, in 2015 via a Kickstarter campaign. Its stated aims are to be an informative and entertaining independent publication.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Affairs_(magazine)

    This is a break from the tried-and-true technique of “dynamic silence”* developed in the last century. This is even a break from the second line of defence currently being deployed: they will talk about “bad” people but almost never to them.

    It’s very interesting to see they’re learning and adapting.

    * http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_silence

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    It’s very interesting to see they’re learning and adapting.

    How exactly? -- by openly and disingenuously mocking rather than doing the 'dynamic silence' thing? -- I don't see much of a change, or the significance of any change.

    As someone responded:

    https://twitter.com/icefire99/status/935248560966135808

    Nathan Robinson of 'Current Affairs' is a white guy who majored in African American Studies -- which is just plain weird.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. EriK says:
    @newrouter
    "If you hit someone just right in the chest, you can sometimes stop their heart. "

    So the driver did a "three bank shot" on fatso Heather. Good Allan you are amusing.

    See: The Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. Jack D says:
    @ben tillman

    Did we ever find out of the guy who panicked and drove into communists is Jewish?
     
    His mom's named Bloom, and I've never head of a gentile named Bloom. His name is Fields, and the only Fields I've ever known is Jewish, but who knows about this guy.

    Aside from the fact that Jewish Nazis are not very common, his name is James Fields, Jr. – Ashkenazi Jews don’t typically name their children after their fathers. Kenton, Kentucky is not a hotbed of Hebrews. Bloom (Anglicized from Blum) is often a Jewish surname but it is also a fairly common British (non-Jewish) surname. Likewise Fields (often Anglicized from Feld). $10.50/ hr security guard is not on the top 10 list of Jewish occupations, etc.

    I know some alt-right types like to groundlessly accuse all sorts of non-Jewish people (e.g. George Zimmerman) of being ((( Jewish))) but this is really a big stretch. If he was a Jewish anti-Semite he was a very, very confused guy like the blind black white-supremacist in the Chapelle sketch:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    If he was a Jewish "anti-semite" he could be just like that real Jewish "anti-semite" who shot himself a while back after being exposed as a Jew (which his white-supremacist buddies seemed not to mind all that much actually).
    , @reiner Tor
    I think the explanation would be that his schizophrenia (and maybe below Jewish average IQ) prevented him from making more money.
    But until further evidence I’d assume he’s gentile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Jack D
    Holocaust deniers deny the Holocaust for the same reason that Muslims deny that 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslims - shame. Holocaust deniers either believe that perpetrating a Holocaust would be shameful or else perceive that the world regards it as shameful, but either way it is a stain on "their team". The easiest way to get rid of this shame/stain is to say "it didn't happen". If it never happened, there is nothing to be ashamed about. We are seeing the same thing with Fields - it didn't happen, he never rammed his car into a crowd, so WN's have nothing to be ashamed about.

    We don't come from a shame/face culture so these kind of denials in the face of clear evidence are not that common in our culture. But in shame cultures they happen all the time. People will do stuff right in front of your face and when you catch them they or their family will deny that the event even happened. You can show them video and they will still deny it. To someone from a Western culture it seems nuts but that's how the human brain works sometimes - psychological defense mechanism can be very powerful, more powerful than reality.

    My point was that holocaust deniers think that the holocaust was bad, and so are quite possibly different from actual real Nazis in that important aspect. They usually also deny Nazi mass murder of gentiles (mostly Slavs), and the Nazi culpability for starting the war. You seem to be in agreement with me: these guys are ashamed of their idol doing these things and so probably wouldn’t do such a shameful thing. (I recognize some of them might only lie about it to have chance to repeat all this, but we’re unlikely to find it out since they have exactly zero chance of coming to power.)

    Now these are the things (holocaust, mass murder of gentiles, starting the war) which make us so horrified when thinking about Nazis. A “Nazi” who doesn’t call himself a Nazi and rejects all three of these is actually not a Nazi: it’s a smear to call him “Nazi”. Because “Nazi” simply means something like “mass murderous war criminal”, and if he’s neither mass murderous nor a war criminal, then on what basis can you call him that?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    Aside from the fact that Jewish Nazis are not very common, his name is James Fields, Jr. - Ashkenazi Jews don't typically name their children after their fathers. Kenton, Kentucky is not a hotbed of Hebrews. Bloom (Anglicized from Blum) is often a Jewish surname but it is also a fairly common British (non-Jewish) surname. Likewise Fields (often Anglicized from Feld). $10.50/ hr security guard is not on the top 10 list of Jewish occupations, etc.

    I know some alt-right types like to groundlessly accuse all sorts of non-Jewish people (e.g. George Zimmerman) of being ((( Jewish))) but this is really a big stretch. If he was a Jewish anti-Semite he was a very, very confused guy like the blind black white-supremacist in the Chapelle sketch:

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3a3f0f

    If he was a Jewish “anti-semite” he could be just like that real Jewish “anti-semite” who shot himself a while back after being exposed as a Jew (which his white-supremacist buddies seemed not to mind all that much actually).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @Jack D
    Aside from the fact that Jewish Nazis are not very common, his name is James Fields, Jr. - Ashkenazi Jews don't typically name their children after their fathers. Kenton, Kentucky is not a hotbed of Hebrews. Bloom (Anglicized from Blum) is often a Jewish surname but it is also a fairly common British (non-Jewish) surname. Likewise Fields (often Anglicized from Feld). $10.50/ hr security guard is not on the top 10 list of Jewish occupations, etc.

    I know some alt-right types like to groundlessly accuse all sorts of non-Jewish people (e.g. George Zimmerman) of being ((( Jewish))) but this is really a big stretch. If he was a Jewish anti-Semite he was a very, very confused guy like the blind black white-supremacist in the Chapelle sketch:

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3a3f0f

    I think the explanation would be that his schizophrenia (and maybe below Jewish average IQ) prevented him from making more money.
    But until further evidence I’d assume he’s gentile.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. MB says: • Website

    Edgy?
    Gimme a brake.
    His Eyemakeup is Way Better than Yours is not edgy?

    OK, OK. We’re talkin’ about the NYSlimes after all.
    Besides tire irons don’t really have any edges to speak of.

    Never mind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  198. @Stan Adams
    For years and years and years, my ritual has been to buy the Thanksgiving edition of the Miami Herald - the thickest paper of the year - and go through all the Black Friday ads. It's a tribute to the Great American Orgy of Naked Consumerism.

    On Thursday, I tried to buy a copy of the English Herald, with absolutely no success. I couldn't find a single copy for sale at any of the places where I looked - two CVSes, two Walgreenses, three gas stations, two convenience stores. Publix (a ubiquitous supermarket chain) would have had it, but all of the company's innumerable locations were closed for the holiday. (As they should have been.)

    While driving around, I spotted a number of Herald vending machines, almost all of which were empty. (One or two of them had ruined papers from weeks ago in their display windows.) Finally, I located a vending machine that, miraculously, had a copy of the Thursday paper in the display window.

    The daily paper now costs $2*, but this edition had the weekend price of $3. (That fact was not mentioned on the price tag on the vending machine. I only noticed it when I looked through the window to verify the date of the edition.) Somehow I managed to scrounge together 12 quarters. It was only then that I discovered that the vending machine, rusted with age, was hopelessly jammed. (At least I got my money back. I had to press the Coin Return button several times, though.) So I was totally out of luck.

    I did pick up the Spanish edition of the paper for $2. It was pretty thick in its own right. A good number of the ads were bilingual, but still.

    I used to eat all the time at a restaurant at a hotel that always had big tall stacks of the Herald at the front desk, free for the taking. (This included the full Sunday paper, complete with all of the extras - the ads, the comics, the weekly TV guide, etc.) The manager told me that the hotel didn't even request them - they were dumped off as a matter of course, to boost circulation. There were always far more copies delivered than there were rooms at the hotel - and this was a decent-sized establishment.

    For years and years and years, I never felt the need to subscribe to the paper - any paper - because free copies were lying around all over the place. Even today, the better hotels have big stacks of unread Wall Street Journals and USA Todays in the lobby.

    Not so many years ago, there were cities where entire neighborhoods got free delivery of the paper seven days a week, courtesy of one local business or another.

    The circulation figures were absolute bullshit for many years. Advertisers got royally ripped off for at least a decade.

    *Ten years ago, the daily Herald cost 35 cents in Dade, and only a quarter in Broward. As late as 2005, the Broward edition of the Sunday paper cost only 50 cents.

    Far and away the most interesting comment on this entire thread.

    Too many of you spend far too much time laboriously responding to obvious trolls – and sometimes I wonder if, at least some of the time, Steve isn’t one of them.

    Let’s prove Pavlov wrong, shall we?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @anon
    She was on the “pleasantly plump” side but not morbidly obese.

    You are more than likely thinking of a woman who isn't Heather Heyer. Most people think Heather Heyer was the woman they saw draped over the hood of the car in an overhead shot. That woman suffered broken legs, but survived. Heather Heyer isn't shown in any of the most common photos of the scene.

    The coroner’s report said she died of blunt force trauma to the chest.


    The issue with that is that she doesn't seem to have been directly hit by his car. His car hit another car, which hit her.

    Whereas, you can also see people being directly hit by his car, at full speed, that are just tossed aside.

    So while I disagree with the idea that she died of a heart attack, her obesity almost certainly had something to do with it.

    I think the uncertainty comes from her mother stating that she died of a heart attack on TV. What I'm guessing happened is that a doctor told the family that she died instantly of "heart failure", which her mother confused with a heart attack, which is technically called "myocardial infarction".

    Whereas, you can also see people being directly hit by his car, at full speed, that are just tossed aside.

    Hardly “at full speed.” Casualties would have been a lot worse.

    One of the photos even shows the break lights on prior to impact.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. polnick says:

    Drummer getting hundreds of love letters. Many have phantasy about being spanked by a Nazi. Some of the requests are from Jewish gals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  201. @dr kill
    The Herald can't collapse, what would Leonard Pitts do? Or David Neal, the world's worst sports writer in a town where that bar is very high. I haven't been back home for 15 years, hat ever did they do with the Herald building? We used to park there for the Orange Bowl Parade.
    I had to recently call the Palm Beach Post circulation office, to have them stop littering my drive with their Sunday effort.

    The old Herald building was demolished in 2013, around the time of its fiftieth birthday.

    McClatchy (the company that bought Knight-Ridder in 2006) moved the operation to Doral, not far from the airport. The Herald signed a 15-year lease for the building that used to house the headquarters of the U.S. Southern Command.

    The bayfront site is an empty lot now. Next month, it is going to be used as the headquarters for “Art Miami” during the Art Basel festival.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/visual-arts/art-basel/4of5io/picture118042113/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/SITEPLAN-112916B

    When Genting – the current owner of the property – bought the site, it wanted to build a hotel/casino on the water, but was stymied by the Florida Legislature.

    The hulk of the old Omni shopping mall, a few blocks to the north, is still mostly vacant. There are various plans for that area. I’m not sure where things stand at the moment.

    The old Art Deco Sears tower on Biscayne is now part of the Adrienne Arsht Center performing-arts complex. An acquaintance of mine volunteers there several times a month. It’s the only way she can afford to get her high-culture fix.

    The downtown area is unrecognizable from how it was 15 years ago. So many shiny new buildings, all eagerly awaiting the arrival of a Category 5 hurricane.

    There are plans to build a 92-story condo tower on the site of One Bayfront Plaza (a 1959 building on Biscayne between SE 1st and 2nd Streets). This tower would dwarf its neighbors – the Southeast Financial Center (SFC – the tallest building in Miami from 1983 to 2003) and One Biscayne Tower (OBT).

    OBT was the tallest building south of Atlanta upon its completion in 1974. (It had a 15% occupancy rate. The original developer went bankrupt.) It looks positively tiny these days.

    In this 1982 shot, OBT is the tallest building (the one with the antenna on the roof). OBP is the smaller building directly to the left of OBT. The building under construction to the left of OBP is the SFC:

    The same general area in 2014:

    A rendering of the planned 92-story building:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    The proposed new tower sort of looks like it was inspired by the new 1 World Trade Center tower. Most of the old ones look like they were inspired by milk cartons. Do they really PAY architects to design these modern buildings, because if they do they should ask for their money back?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @Chris Mallory
    If your actions cause a bystander to have a heart attack, depending on state law, you can be charged with their death.

    Her poor health is not a defense, look up the eggshell doctrine.

    What if the eggshell is part of a mob unlawfully blocking the street, smashing the windows of occupied vehicles, and threatening the trapped drivers with imminent bodily harm? Is there a doctrine for that, Mr. Dershowitz?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    Holocaust deniers deny the Holocaust for the same reason that Muslims deny that 9/11 was perpetrated by Muslims - shame. Holocaust deniers either believe that perpetrating a Holocaust would be shameful or else perceive that the world regards it as shameful, but either way it is a stain on "their team". The easiest way to get rid of this shame/stain is to say "it didn't happen". If it never happened, there is nothing to be ashamed about. We are seeing the same thing with Fields - it didn't happen, he never rammed his car into a crowd, so WN's have nothing to be ashamed about.

    We don't come from a shame/face culture so these kind of denials in the face of clear evidence are not that common in our culture. But in shame cultures they happen all the time. People will do stuff right in front of your face and when you catch them they or their family will deny that the event even happened. You can show them video and they will still deny it. To someone from a Western culture it seems nuts but that's how the human brain works sometimes - psychological defense mechanism can be very powerful, more powerful than reality.

    The easiest way to get rid of this shame/stain is to say “it didn’t happen”. If it never happened, there is nothing to be ashamed about. We are seeing the same thing with Fields – it didn’t happen, he never rammed his car into a crowd, so WN’s have nothing to be ashamed about.

    Actually the easiest way is to not embrace national socialism and dress up like a Nazi (or as much as a Nazi as you ignorantly think you can get away with without anyone noticing).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @reiner Tor

    He’s a neo-nazi because he embraces national socialism.
     
    Again, that's not the same as actual Nazis. He doesn't call himself Nazi (neo or original), so why lazily adapt the leftist smear-word? After skimming through the tradwoker program, National Socialist is used not in its 1933-45 Germany meaning, but simply as a national kind of socialism - i.e. something like Sweden with a strong nationalistic (instead of globalist/anti-white) ideological foundation. They want to nationalize a number of industries (but not nearly all of them, i.e. no communism), and they stand for freedom of expression (except for anti-whites, which makes them again quite similar to Sweden, except they'd change the ideology).

    So why use the lazy and incorrect leftist smear-word?

    I’ve seen plenty of people say that Holocaust didn’t happened but should have. And the number of neo nazis who say that the holocaust, had it happened would have been a bad thing is very small.
     
    That's your assertion. I don't think it's true, not in my experience. For example Greg Johnson (Counter Currents Publishing) thinks the holocaust numbers might be exaggerated (I remember in a comment he wrote about how there was a Jewish hospital in Berlin in 1945, and how to square it with the fact the Germans were supposedly murdering Jews as policy - why would they only kill healthy Jews..?*), but he wrote in no uncertain terms that exterminating all Jews would be bad. Instead, he supports sending all Jews to Israel.

    Why bother?
     
    Don't embrace national socialism if that's not your thing. But don't join in the leftist lynch mob. Don't accept their limits to the discussion.

    You know, if "actual swastika-bearing Nazis" are allowed to be part of public discourse, than your views will look like normal, moderate views. Which I don't doubt they are. But if you allow the "real actual Nazis" to be banned from public discourse, then you'll now be the most extreme political position. This is uncomfortable on several levels. One is that you'll be accused of harboring secret Nazi sympathies (because if Nazism is illegal, then there must be people who are secret Nazis but to avoid prosecution will express the rightmost legal views, i.e. your views). Another is that limiting public discourse will never stop to your right. They will eventually come after you (heck, that's what they're doing already) after (or even before) they finished their business banning "real actual Nazis".

    You must've heard the "first they came for the communists..." quote. Actually, the communists in that quote were actual Stalinists (in 1933, when they came for them), with goals to establish totalitarian government. But Niemöller felt that he should've spoken out when "they came for the communists". Now they're coming for the "neo-Nazis". You should understand why that's a bad thing.



    *I could answer Greg's question, but that's not point here, the point is that he's doubting the holocaust as such. My answer to Greg would be that there were different categories of Jews, and some, like half-Jews with 50% German ancestry, or Jews with German spouses, were more difficult to remove due to the adverse effects it might've had (or so Hitler&Co. feared) on the German populace. So they decided to

    I never said anyone should be banned. I said that an article writing about a neo Nazi sympathetically shouldn’t cheat by completely eliding the worst parts of his ideology. Show him as a kind, thoughtful, considerate, and whatever person (as longs it’s accurate) but also give people a more comprehensive view of what neonazism actually is. That’s a noble worthwhile article to write.

    I think you’re being completely naïve. You could embrace everything that you see as positive in their platform not just without embracing Nazi terminology and iconography but by actually specifically denouncing it. Occams razor says that it’s a dog whistle.

    And the idea that Hitler was any kind of a model of socialisism, or even a benefactor of the white race, is laughable. He enriched his crony friends and started wars that killed millions of his own people (and millions upon millions of other white people). It’s just completely ridiculous that anyone interested in anything other than a) trolling or b) near genocidal or worse policies against jews would embrace him.

    To quote George Orwell

    The British ruling class were not altogether wrong in thinking that Fascism was on their side. It is a fact that any rich man, unless he is a Jew, has less to fear from Fascism than from either Communism or democratic Socialism. One ought never to forget this, for nearly the whole of German and Italian propaganda is designed to cover it up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    but also give people a more comprehensive view of what neonazism actually is.

    What actually is "neonazism"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Jack D says:
    @Amigo
    I get it, you like fat women. Normal people don't.

    Here she is on a stretcher. This is not pleasantly plump:

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Heather-Heyer-on-stretcher-photo-c.jpg

    You’re sure that’s Heather Heyer? Because it doesn’t look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.

    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don’t you know that Heather’s family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Amasius
    If you put in "Heather heyer menthols" you get more informative results.

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/heather-heyer-photo-b.jpg

    https://i0.wp.com/www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/heyer.jpg

    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DI_7tk5UMAIgFsr.jpg

    I wonder what her clean and jerk was. She's as wide as Rezazadeh. But there was that heart condition to worry about.

    , @anon
    Because it doesn’t look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer.

    Yes it does. It looks like her face. And you haven't seen any pictures of her from the family that are below the shoulders.

    If you don't know how this game works, you have clearly never tried online dating.

    Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life?

    No offense to your girl here, Jack ol' boy, but if I took it upon myself to play in traffic while my junk was hanging out, and I got hit by a car, I would look down upon myself from Heaven and say "Man. I sure wish I hadn't chosen so poorly.".

    Don’t you know that Heather’s family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images?

    Well. Perhaps they should have taught her that playing in traffic is dangerous, like my parents did.
    , @Anon

    Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way
     
    No it isn't. Don't play on that level, please.
    , @Brutusale
    Not the obese woman being put forward here, but by no measure "pleasingly plump", either.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mourners-pack-memorial-charlottesville-victim-heather-heyer-article-1.3416710
    , @Amigo
    You wish ill to me and my family and then ask where is my humanity?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. Amasius says:
    @Amigo
    I get it, you like fat women. Normal people don't.

    Here she is on a stretcher. This is not pleasantly plump:

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Heather-Heyer-on-stretcher-photo-c.jpg
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Jack D says:
    @Stan Adams
    The old Herald building was demolished in 2013, around the time of its fiftieth birthday.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/wwaem4/picture12318008/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/01HERALDBUILDING_CPJ.JPG

    McClatchy (the company that bought Knight-Ridder in 2006) moved the operation to Doral, not far from the airport. The Herald signed a 15-year lease for the building that used to house the headquarters of the U.S. Southern Command.

    The bayfront site is an empty lot now. Next month, it is going to be used as the headquarters for "Art Miami" during the Art Basel festival.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/visual-arts/art-basel/4of5io/picture118042113/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/SITEPLAN-112916B

    When Genting - the current owner of the property - bought the site, it wanted to build a hotel/casino on the water, but was stymied by the Florida Legislature.

    The hulk of the old Omni shopping mall, a few blocks to the north, is still mostly vacant. There are various plans for that area. I'm not sure where things stand at the moment.

    The old Art Deco Sears tower on Biscayne is now part of the Adrienne Arsht Center performing-arts complex. An acquaintance of mine volunteers there several times a month. It's the only way she can afford to get her high-culture fix.

    The downtown area is unrecognizable from how it was 15 years ago. So many shiny new buildings, all eagerly awaiting the arrival of a Category 5 hurricane.

    There are plans to build a 92-story condo tower on the site of One Bayfront Plaza (a 1959 building on Biscayne between SE 1st and 2nd Streets). This tower would dwarf its neighbors - the Southeast Financial Center (SFC - the tallest building in Miami from 1983 to 2003) and One Biscayne Tower (OBT).

    OBT was the tallest building south of Atlanta upon its completion in 1974. (It had a 15% occupancy rate. The original developer went bankrupt.) It looks positively tiny these days.

    In this 1982 shot, OBT is the tallest building (the one with the antenna on the roof). OBP is the smaller building directly to the left of OBT. The building under construction to the left of OBP is the SFC:
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/miami17/edballbldg1982miamistallest.jpg

    The same general area in 2014:
    http://www.orlandotomiamishuttle.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/3-13-14-Miami-Skyline.jpg

    A rendering of the planned 92-story building:
    https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/2BMkXOkrvygU1fKORNiXoQrrcY4=/0x0:3255x2008/1200x800/filters:focal(1021x1056:1541x1576)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/53411229/u6pFnSl.0.jpg

    The proposed new tower sort of looks like it was inspired by the new 1 World Trade Center tower. Most of the old ones look like they were inspired by milk cartons. Do they really PAY architects to design these modern buildings, because if they do they should ask for their money back?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    Here's another view of the proposed design:
    http://www.fecr.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/2017-One-Bayfront-Plaza.jpg

    And here's the developer:
    https://media.bizj.us/view/img/2558451/hollo-tibor*1024xx1280-722-0-375.jpg

    His bio:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibor_Hollo

    Hollo has been criticized for building high rises that separated the city from its waterfront and for building "big, bulky, inimical buildings that are foreboding to look at and unpleasant to walk around."
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Amasius says:
    @Jack D
    You're sure that's Heather Heyer? Because it doesn't look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.



    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don't you know that Heather's family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?

    If you put in “Heather heyer menthols” you get more informative results.

    I wonder what her clean and jerk was. She’s as wide as Rezazadeh. But there was that heart condition to worry about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Kabala
    See my comment above. That is not Heather Heyer. Even the guy who first posted it here admitted it was someone else, but he pretty clearly hoped that other people would mistakenly assume it was. Ignore the weight one way or the other - the face is completely different. She also seems to be a decade or more older than Heyer. The stretcher photo someone else posted seems to me to be unclear, but this one is definitely not Heyer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Ben Frank says:

    Reading NYT and its comments is like going to the Land of Oz.
    The real world is hardly visible from there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  210. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    You're sure that's Heather Heyer? Because it doesn't look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.



    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don't you know that Heather's family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?

    Because it doesn’t look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer.

    Yes it does. It looks like her face. And you haven’t seen any pictures of her from the family that are below the shoulders.

    If you don’t know how this game works, you have clearly never tried online dating.

    Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life?

    No offense to your girl here, Jack ol’ boy, but if I took it upon myself to play in traffic while my junk was hanging out, and I got hit by a car, I would look down upon myself from Heaven and say “Man. I sure wish I hadn’t chosen so poorly.”.

    Don’t you know that Heather’s family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images?

    Well. Perhaps they should have taught her that playing in traffic is dangerous, like my parents did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    You're sure that's Heather Heyer? Because it doesn't look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.



    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don't you know that Heather's family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?

    Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way

    No it isn’t. Don’t play on that level, please.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. eah says:
    @Cagey Beast
    I just spotted an extremely interesting tweet from a normie account in reply to that one you posted from Enoch. The tweeter was:

    Current Affairs is a magazine that publishes bi-monthly in print and online. It was started by Nathan J. Robinson, a PhD student at Harvard University, in 2015 via a Kickstarter campaign. Its stated aims are to be an informative and entertaining independent publication.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Affairs_(magazine)

    This is a break from the tried-and-true technique of "dynamic silence"* developed in the last century. This is even a break from the second line of defence currently being deployed: they will talk about "bad" people but almost never to them.

    It's very interesting to see they're learning and adapting.

    * http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_silence

    https://twitter.com/curaffairs/status/935180261515563009

    It’s very interesting to see they’re learning and adapting.

    How exactly? — by openly and disingenuously mocking rather than doing the ‘dynamic silence’ thing? — I don’t see much of a change, or the significance of any change.

    As someone responded:

    Nathan Robinson of ‘Current Affairs’ is a white guy who majored in African American Studies — which is just plain weird.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I can't add anything to my earlier comment to help you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. Brutusale says:
    @Opinionator
    Is coroner fact finding susceptible to politics, as judicial fact finding is said to be? Does a coroner ever face situations where the "cause" of death is in fact multicausal (even just in a "but for" sense) or ambiguous, and where the evidence could give rise to more than one defensible interpretation or finding of "ultimate" cause?

    How much societal pressure was there pointing this coroner in the direction of a "blunt force trauma" conclusion?

    Coroners and morgues are government agents and agencies. Their prime objective is their own continuity. Giving its superiors the data that the superiors want is high on any list of tasks that serve the agency’s continued existence.

    My SWPL town had a heroin overdose in the men’s room of the local coffee shop. The EMTs hit him with NARCAN and loaded him into the ambulance. After the local real estate people were done talking to the mayor, the item appeared in the police report as a drunk coffee shop patron.

    We can’t handle the truth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    No, you can't handle the truth!
    https://youtu.be/MMzd40i8TfA
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @Cagey Beast
    What would be worse for the Establishment than having a country full of young, alienated White people who are neo-Nazis? Having a country full of young, alienated White people who aren't neo-Nazis. What if the American liberal consensus is faced with millions of articulate, even-tempered young Whites who have simply chosen to redraw their mental map of the world after comparing reality to the official narrative they'd been given in school?

    People should have a look at this video to get a sense of what I mean:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cnyPwAuVLo

    A longer YouTube video, called "The Perils of Civic Nationalism" by "Blonde in the Belly of the Beast" lays out similar arguments over 12 minutes. These are two examples of White people simply abandoning the grand narrative we'd all been told since at least the mid-1960s. No neo-Nazism was required to perform this manoeuvre.

    I have no clue what was the problem with this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. Brutusale says:
    @Thomas

    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable.
     
    That's the only place I've mentioned any variant of the word "liability" (and not even that word per se) in this discussion, and, as the first nine words of that sentence makes clear, I'm discussing causation.

    Causation is easy: she was jaywalking. Or jaywaddling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas
    I don't think she's going to be charged with suicide, and Fields' alleged act still stands as a proximate cause.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. BB753 says:
    @Brutusale
    Coroners and morgues are government agents and agencies. Their prime objective is their own continuity. Giving its superiors the data that the superiors want is high on any list of tasks that serve the agency's continued existence.

    My SWPL town had a heroin overdose in the men's room of the local coffee shop. The EMTs hit him with NARCAN and loaded him into the ambulance. After the local real estate people were done talking to the mayor, the item appeared in the police report as a drunk coffee shop patron.

    We can't handle the truth.

    No, you can’t handle the truth!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. Brutusale says:
    @Jack D
    You're sure that's Heather Heyer? Because it doesn't look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.



    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don't you know that Heather's family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?

    Not the obese woman being put forward here, but by no measure “pleasingly plump”, either.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mourners-pack-memorial-charlottesville-victim-heather-heyer-article-1.3416710

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. Amigo says:
    @Jack D
    You're sure that's Heather Heyer? Because it doesn't look like any other known photo of Heather Heyer. Try google images.



    PS Regardless of who that is, it is my wish to you that someday one of your loved ones will be publicly depicted in such a degrading way when they are unconscious after an accident. Maybe someone can get a shot of you with your junk hanging out after the paramedics have worked to save your life? Bonus points if the image is not really that of your loved one but instead depicts her as a morbidly obese person. Have you no humanity? Don't you know that Heather's family will be googling for stories about her and will come across these images? Is it really worth it to score cheap points this way?

    You wish ill to me and my family and then ask where is my humanity?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. @eah
    It’s very interesting to see they’re learning and adapting.

    How exactly? -- by openly and disingenuously mocking rather than doing the 'dynamic silence' thing? -- I don't see much of a change, or the significance of any change.

    As someone responded:

    https://twitter.com/icefire99/status/935248560966135808

    Nathan Robinson of 'Current Affairs' is a white guy who majored in African American Studies -- which is just plain weird.

    I can’t add anything to my earlier comment to help you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    They still do when it's a matter of attacking America. Of course that makes anyone who agrees a Nazi when the time comes to denounce him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. NOTA says:
    @anonymous
    There is always a risk that someone with opposing views can come across quite sympathetic. That is why the media choose to keep the likes of David Duke in the spotlight. He will garner no sympathy.

    This happened in the run up to the Iraq war, too—no mainstream media outlet was going to give a coherent and normal looking opponent of the war a platform, but they’d show hostile foreigners or aging hippies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. @Amasius
    If you put in "Heather heyer menthols" you get more informative results.

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/heather-heyer-photo-b.jpg

    https://i0.wp.com/www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/heyer.jpg

    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DI_7tk5UMAIgFsr.jpg

    I wonder what her clean and jerk was. She's as wide as Rezazadeh. But there was that heart condition to worry about.

    See my comment above. That is not Heather Heyer. Even the guy who first posted it here admitted it was someone else, but he pretty clearly hoped that other people would mistakenly assume it was. Ignore the weight one way or the other – the face is completely different. She also seems to be a decade or more older than Heyer. The stretcher photo someone else posted seems to me to be unclear, but this one is definitely not Heyer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Amasius
    It's the same shirt and same build. Teal shirt on the hood is a red herring, black shirt is Big Heather. If you've got other photos of the "real Heather" at Charlottesville, please share.

    Being morbidly obese makes you look older. Having your hair pulled back for combat also makes you look different. How old was she in the well-lighted media-friendly portrait photos? Who knows? Trayvon Martin didn't really look like the media's 12-year-old boy when Zim-Zam put him down.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Amasius says:
    @James Kabala
    See my comment above. That is not Heather Heyer. Even the guy who first posted it here admitted it was someone else, but he pretty clearly hoped that other people would mistakenly assume it was. Ignore the weight one way or the other - the face is completely different. She also seems to be a decade or more older than Heyer. The stretcher photo someone else posted seems to me to be unclear, but this one is definitely not Heyer.

    It’s the same shirt and same build. Teal shirt on the hood is a red herring, black shirt is Big Heather. If you’ve got other photos of the “real Heather” at Charlottesville, please share.

    Being morbidly obese makes you look older. Having your hair pulled back for combat also makes you look different. How old was she in the well-lighted media-friendly portrait photos? Who knows? Trayvon Martin didn’t really look like the media’s 12-year-old boy when Zim-Zam put him down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Kabala
    I think she probably is the woman on the stretcher in the other photo above, who also has a black shirt and is also (less drastically) overweight but seems to have a different face.

    Old age and different lighting do not alter the entire structure of your face. Hoodie Trayvon still looked like an older version of cherubic Trayvon. The acknowledged photos of Heyer vary quite a bit in haircut and hair color and apparent age but are still clearly of the same person as each other. The woman in this photo looks different.

    I guess it is hard to make a perfect assessment without a frontal view of your woman (or a profile view in known photos of Heyer), but my money (were I to bet) would be against the identification of the two.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. @Jack D
    The proposed new tower sort of looks like it was inspired by the new 1 World Trade Center tower. Most of the old ones look like they were inspired by milk cartons. Do they really PAY architects to design these modern buildings, because if they do they should ask for their money back?

    Here’s another view of the proposed design:

    And here’s the developer:

    His bio:

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

    Hollo has been criticized for building high rises that separated the city from its waterfront and for building “big, bulky, inimical buildings that are foreboding to look at and unpleasant to walk around.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. @Hail
    There are problems with the Ngram algorithm after year 2000 which is why it defaults to end at 2000 and refuses to even give data after 2008.

    I think Ngram works fine through 2007, but not through 2008, when they must have stopped collecting data partway through the year. You have to turn off the smoothing by setting it to zero.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hail
    Ngram data for year 2008 definitely shows anomalies, sharp drop-offs.

    Certain searches do suggest a lesser distortion for Ngram data after year 2000, presumably by something having to do with the rise of the Internet at the same time. If I am right in this, Ngram is reliable only for the pre-Internet era.

    Consider:

    - For the phrase 'World War II' (zero smoothing, 1940 to 2007), we see a very steady rate of usage from 1950s to 1990s, and then a drop-off after year 2000 (the decline actually starts in 2002), implying its relative usage fell by 25% from 2002 to 2007, by which time, Ngram would have us believe, the phrase was at its lowest-ever relative usage since its coinage in the mid 1940s. (Note that the 2008 data on this one is visibly and surely unreliable.) 'Hitler' also records a 25% drop 2000-2007.

    Do those of us alive and cognizant in the 2002 to 2007 period remember it as an era of rapidly fading memory of World War II, of steadily less-and-less discussion thereof? As opposed to the late 1990s up to 2001? This does not seem plausible to me, not for the world I remember. This suggests something else is going on with this data after 2000.

    - 'World War I', likewise, Ngram thinks underwent a sudden usage decline of about 25% from 2002 to 2007: a sudden loss in interest after 90 years of steady interest (or at least relative appearance in the Ngram corpus). The same with 'Korean War': Steady rates since the 1950s, then a quick and steady decline from about 2000 (in earnest, 2002).

    - As for 'racist' and 'racists,' Ngram thinks they, too, began to decline after 2000 to the extent that by 2006-7, 'racists' declined to about 75% its 2000-1 level. Plausible? We see the same with 'ethnocentrism'. All of these, going by Ngram data, were in steady decline in the 2000s, suggesting a political trend that did not actually occur, at least not in the world I know of. (Alternatively, there is a data reliability issue.)

    - Getting off the political, we find that Ngram thinks jazz began a steady decline in year 2000, as did disco music (20% decline in the five years 2002 to 2007, after an almost a 25-year-long steady appearance rate, 1979-2002). To finish up with two old ISteve standbys: Ngram believes golf courses peaked around year 2000 (or just before it) with steady decline after 2000; IQ tests, likewise, a 25% loss from 2000 to 2007. Plausible?

    - None of these (jazz, disco, golf courses, or IQ tests) were "uptrending" in the 2000s, of course, but there is also no reason to assume they would all begin to decline at the same time at such a stark rate. What may be going on is that they did maintain a 'real' usage rate in the 2000s that was about the same as immediately before, but the effect of the Internet is such that any word/phrase not growing would be shown to be declining.

    - The good news is: If my conjecture on Ngram 'inflation' for the 2000s is correct, it means the solid growth that Ngram attributes to 'Steve Sailer' for the 2004 to 2007 period is actually a good deal higher than it appears. (I think an Ngram extended to 2017 for 'Steve Sailer' would be orders of magnitude higher still.) (Just for fun: "Ron Unz vs. Steve Sailer vs. John Derbyshire, 1990 to 2007.")
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Did anyone speculate that the reason this guy sympathizes with Nazis is that he saw Cabaret and shares a natural bond with anyone who wants to rid themselves of the insufferable Christopher Isherwood?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  226. @Amasius
    It's the same shirt and same build. Teal shirt on the hood is a red herring, black shirt is Big Heather. If you've got other photos of the "real Heather" at Charlottesville, please share.

    Being morbidly obese makes you look older. Having your hair pulled back for combat also makes you look different. How old was she in the well-lighted media-friendly portrait photos? Who knows? Trayvon Martin didn't really look like the media's 12-year-old boy when Zim-Zam put him down.

    I think she probably is the woman on the stretcher in the other photo above, who also has a black shirt and is also (less drastically) overweight but seems to have a different face.

    Old age and different lighting do not alter the entire structure of your face. Hoodie Trayvon still looked like an older version of cherubic Trayvon. The acknowledged photos of Heyer vary quite a bit in haircut and hair color and apparent age but are still clearly of the same person as each other. The woman in this photo looks different.

    I guess it is hard to make a perfect assessment without a frontal view of your woman (or a profile view in known photos of Heyer), but my money (were I to bet) would be against the identification of the two.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    People's body shape probably appears differently when lying down versus standing up. Gravity acts on the mass differently and it is possible that fat sinks into the stomach cavity when on one's back.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. @anon
    I never said anyone should be banned. I said that an article writing about a neo Nazi sympathetically shouldn't cheat by completely eliding the worst parts of his ideology. Show him as a kind, thoughtful, considerate, and whatever person (as longs it's accurate) but also give people a more comprehensive view of what neonazism actually is. That's a noble worthwhile article to write.

    I think you're being completely naïve. You could embrace everything that you see as positive in their platform not just without embracing Nazi terminology and iconography but by actually specifically denouncing it. Occams razor says that it's a dog whistle.

    And the idea that Hitler was any kind of a model of socialisism, or even a benefactor of the white race, is laughable. He enriched his crony friends and started wars that killed millions of his own people (and millions upon millions of other white people). It's just completely ridiculous that anyone interested in anything other than a) trolling or b) near genocidal or worse policies against jews would embrace him.

    To quote George Orwell

    The British ruling class were not altogether wrong in thinking that Fascism was on their side. It is a fact that any rich man, unless he is a Jew, has less to fear from Fascism than from either Communism or democratic Socialism. One ought never to forget this, for nearly the whole of German and Italian propaganda is designed to cover it up.
     

    but also give people a more comprehensive view of what neonazism actually is.

    What actually is “neonazism”?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. @James Kabala
    I think she probably is the woman on the stretcher in the other photo above, who also has a black shirt and is also (less drastically) overweight but seems to have a different face.

    Old age and different lighting do not alter the entire structure of your face. Hoodie Trayvon still looked like an older version of cherubic Trayvon. The acknowledged photos of Heyer vary quite a bit in haircut and hair color and apparent age but are still clearly of the same person as each other. The woman in this photo looks different.

    I guess it is hard to make a perfect assessment without a frontal view of your woman (or a profile view in known photos of Heyer), but my money (were I to bet) would be against the identification of the two.

    People’s body shape probably appears differently when lying down versus standing up. Gravity acts on the mass differently and it is possible that fat sinks into the stomach cavity when on one’s back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Thomas says:
    @anon
    The general rule of causation in criminal law is that if the result would not have happened “but for” the defendant’s action, and there was not some sort of intervening cause that was either unforeseeable or else bizarre and unusual, the defendant is liable.

    It's pretty bizarre and unusual for someone to be standing in the street and blocking traffic in the middle of a riot.

    Imagine you were running out of a burning building and, right after you got out the door, you ran into an old lady, knocked her over, and she hit her head on something and died.

    Are you liable? Sure, I suppose so. But you can still argue that you were just trying to get to safety, and you couldn't help the fact that she was standing there and blocking your exit. It obviously wouldn't be the same thing as you just taking it upon yourself to run into the old lady for no reason, on an uncrowded sidewalk or something.

    I mean, I can't say for sure that Fields will be able to convince people of that. But it's certainly possible.

    Again, in the hypothetical you mention (knocking someone over), causation would still not be an issue. Intent (mens rea) would be. I suppose Fields could try to argue that he accidentally or unintentionally drove into the crowd. Causation still would not be at issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    I know, and I agree. I'm not arguing the whole "Well, she died of a heart attack, so it wasn't Fields's fault!" thing. I think that would be kind of a silly argument if it was true, and I don't really believe it anyway. The only reason I mentioned it at all was because of Jack D's denials.

    That being said, if our main concern here is not Fields's legal guilt, but whether or not Heather Heyer might still be alive today if things were different, then her decision to do something stupid and dangerous while being obese certainly does come into it.

    But you'll notice that nobody actually cares. Heather Heyer is like the white Trayvon. Nobody cared about him while he was alive either, so nobody was really all that sad that he died. She, like Trayvon, is more valuable to them as a symbol of the evils of white racism now that she's dead than she ever would have been if she survived.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. Thomas says:
    @Brutusale
    Causation is easy: she was jaywalking. Or jaywaddling.

    I don’t think she’s going to be charged with suicide, and Fields’ alleged act still stands as a proximate cause.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Lagertha says:

    Wow. It took the supposed, best of the best, of journalists of the NYT to accept like, flogged rescue dogs, or their bosses, who condescend to them and say: You effed up! You did not demonize this one fucking guy in Ohio to influence a shitload of other readers of the NYT that we are at crossroads with! You did not do your job.” Hahahahhhahhahhahhaaaaa.

    These people (the ones that chewed-out their underlings) are going to hell. I am still, now, 5 for 0 in the last 5 years. I win, yey. And, I am happy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  232. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Thomas
    Again, in the hypothetical you mention (knocking someone over), causation would still not be an issue. Intent (mens rea) would be. I suppose Fields could try to argue that he accidentally or unintentionally drove into the crowd. Causation still would not be at issue.

    I know, and I agree. I’m not arguing the whole “Well, she died of a heart attack, so it wasn’t Fields’s fault!” thing. I think that would be kind of a silly argument if it was true, and I don’t really believe it anyway. The only reason I mentioned it at all was because of Jack D’s denials.

    That being said, if our main concern here is not Fields’s legal guilt, but whether or not Heather Heyer might still be alive today if things were different, then her decision to do something stupid and dangerous while being obese certainly does come into it.

    But you’ll notice that nobody actually cares. Heather Heyer is like the white Trayvon. Nobody cared about him while he was alive either, so nobody was really all that sad that he died. She, like Trayvon, is more valuable to them as a symbol of the evils of white racism now that she’s dead than she ever would have been if she survived.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomas

    That being said, if our main concern here is not Fields’s legal guilt, but whether or not Heather Heyer might still be alive today if things were different, then her decision to do something stupid and dangerous while being obese certainly does come into it.
     
    The completely blameless murder victim is a rarity, and also utterly unnecessary to holding a murderer accountable.

    But you’ll notice that nobody actually cares. Heather Heyer is like the white Trayvon. Nobody cared about him while he was alive either, so nobody was really all that sad that he died. She, like Trayvon, is more valuable to them as a symbol of the evils of white racism now that she’s dead than she ever would have been if she survived.
     
    George Zimmerman was of course acquitted, because there was sufficient evidence demonstrating that Trayvon Martin was attacking him and could have killed him. I doubt James Alex Fields will be able to claim anything similar regarding Heather Heyer.

    Last thing I'll say about this is that I really wish people would reflect a little more before they'd adopt Fields as a martyr or engage in these lame, tortured conspiracy theories about heart attacks. It sounds like nothing so much as an echo of SJWs adopting Trayvon or "Big Mike" Brown as innocent martyrs, the alt-right equivalent of "hands up, don't shoot," or (as Jack D suggested) Muslims trying to spin away responsibility for 9/11.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. eah says:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  234. eah says:
    @Chris Mallory
    Your constant waving the flag about the victim's health is a straw man to take the attention away from the fact that the only thing that matters in this case is how culpable the driver was for running into the crowd. Her poor health will not mitigate his guilt if he is found at fault.

    how culpable the driver was for running into the crowd

    I can answer that for you: not culpable at all — so far I provided three examples of people who were seriously injured or killed after either leaving or being forcibly removed from their vehicles in similar threatening situations (I could no doubt find more) — so in essence you seem to be saying/implying that a driver caught like that cannot simply use the vehicle to escape — because doing so might cause someone nearby to have a heart attack and die — I mean, you never know, right? — best to sit there and accept your fate.

    “LOL”

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPryMWvU8AEHITP.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. Thomas says:
    @anon
    I know, and I agree. I'm not arguing the whole "Well, she died of a heart attack, so it wasn't Fields's fault!" thing. I think that would be kind of a silly argument if it was true, and I don't really believe it anyway. The only reason I mentioned it at all was because of Jack D's denials.

    That being said, if our main concern here is not Fields's legal guilt, but whether or not Heather Heyer might still be alive today if things were different, then her decision to do something stupid and dangerous while being obese certainly does come into it.

    But you'll notice that nobody actually cares. Heather Heyer is like the white Trayvon. Nobody cared about him while he was alive either, so nobody was really all that sad that he died. She, like Trayvon, is more valuable to them as a symbol of the evils of white racism now that she's dead than she ever would have been if she survived.

    That being said, if our main concern here is not Fields’s legal guilt, but whether or not Heather Heyer might still be alive today if things were different, then her decision to do something stupid and dangerous while being obese certainly does come into it.

    The completely blameless murder victim is a rarity, and also utterly unnecessary to holding a murderer accountable.

    But you’ll notice that nobody actually cares. Heather Heyer is like the white Trayvon. Nobody cared about him while he was alive either, so nobody was really all that sad that he died. She, like Trayvon, is more valuable to them as a symbol of the evils of white racism now that she’s dead than she ever would have been if she survived.

    George Zimmerman was of course acquitted, because there was sufficient evidence demonstrating that Trayvon Martin was attacking him and could have killed him. I doubt James Alex Fields will be able to claim anything similar regarding Heather Heyer.

    Last thing I’ll say about this is that I really wish people would reflect a little more before they’d adopt Fields as a martyr or engage in these lame, tortured conspiracy theories about heart attacks. It sounds like nothing so much as an echo of SJWs adopting Trayvon or “Big Mike” Brown as innocent martyrs, the alt-right equivalent of “hands up, don’t shoot,” or (as Jack D suggested) Muslims trying to spin away responsibility for 9/11.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    utterly unnecessary to holding a murderer accountable.

    Is there a reason you keep harping on this after I already agreed?

    I doubt James Alex Fields will be able to claim anything similar regarding Heather Heyer.

    He also didn't put a bullet through the heart of Heather Heyer from a foot or so away.

    It sounds like nothing so much as an echo of SJWs adopting Trayvon or “Big Mike” Brown as innocent martyrs, the alt-right equivalent of “hands up, don’t shoot,” or (as Jack D suggested) Muslims trying to spin away responsibility for 9/11.

    Fine, fine. Whatever.

    What I will continue to point out, however, is that James Fields did something that many, many people sympathized with, right up until this past August.

    I already pointed this out before, but I'll go ahead and provide some links.

    https://youtu.be/18q8lnpCPq4

    https://youtu.be/991jkBCwnAE

    https://youtu.be/nLExMuCGdOU

    Running over protesters blocking traffic is as American as apple pie. This is an automotive culture, and there's something so infuriating about idiots blocking traffic that a lot of people can't even articulate it.

    Now, does that make it right? I don't know. But like I said, just read the comments on those. Every single one of them sympathizes with the driver.

    Do the people watching those videos seem to be reacting the way they would react if they were witnessing a terror attack, or even an attempted murder? Nope.

    And there are dozens more videos, just like those.

    So I have to say, I find it highly comical that all of a sudden, everyone thinks driving over protesters is just the worst, most unforgivable thing to do, just because an eeebil Notsie did it.

    So perhaps people aren't defending him because he's an "alt-right" martyr. Some of them are, sure. But some of them are just reacting the way all those other thousands of people reacted prior to this past summer, when other people did the exact same thing (some of whom, like in the first video, don't even have the excuse of being in the middle of a riot), before the media convinced them, and you, that blocking traffic in the middle of a dangerous situation was a totally acceptable thing to do.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. eah says:
    @eah
    how culpable the driver was for running into the crowd

    I can answer that for you: not culpable at all -- so far I provided three examples of people who were seriously injured or killed after either leaving or being forcibly removed from their vehicles in similar threatening situations (I could no doubt find more) -- so in essence you seem to be saying/implying that a driver caught like that cannot simply use the vehicle to escape -- because doing so might cause someone nearby to have a heart attack and die -- I mean, you never know, right? -- best to sit there and accept your fate.

    "LOL"

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    https://twitter.com/KyleBristow/status/935673245025566720
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. Hail says: • Website
    @Steve Sailer
    I think Ngram works fine through 2007, but not through 2008, when they must have stopped collecting data partway through the year. You have to turn off the smoothing by setting it to zero.

    Ngram data for year 2008 definitely shows anomalies, sharp drop-offs.

    Certain searches do suggest a lesser distortion for Ngram data after year 2000, presumably by something having to do with the rise of the Internet at the same time. If I am right in this, Ngram is reliable only for the pre-Internet era.

    Consider:

    - For the phrase ‘World War II‘ (zero smoothing, 1940 to 2007), we see a very steady rate of usage from 1950s to 1990s, and then a drop-off after year 2000 (the decline actually starts in 2002), implying its relative usage fell by 25% from 2002 to 2007, by which time, Ngram would have us believe, the phrase was at its lowest-ever relative usage since its coinage in the mid 1940s. (Note that the 2008 data on this one is visibly and surely unreliable.) ‘Hitler’ also records a 25% drop 2000-2007.

    Do those of us alive and cognizant in the 2002 to 2007 period remember it as an era of rapidly fading memory of World War II, of steadily less-and-less discussion thereof? As opposed to the late 1990s up to 2001? This does not seem plausible to me, not for the world I remember. This suggests something else is going on with this data after 2000.

    - ‘World War I’, likewise, Ngram thinks underwent a sudden usage decline of about 25% from 2002 to 2007: a sudden loss in interest after 90 years of steady interest (or at least relative appearance in the Ngram corpus). The same with ‘Korean War‘: Steady rates since the 1950s, then a quick and steady decline from about 2000 (in earnest, 2002).

    - As for ‘racist‘ and ‘racists,’ Ngram thinks they, too, began to decline after 2000 to the extent that by 2006-7, ‘racists’ declined to about 75% its 2000-1 level. Plausible? We see the same with ‘ethnocentrism‘. All of these, going by Ngram data, were in steady decline in the 2000s, suggesting a political trend that did not actually occur, at least not in the world I know of. (Alternatively, there is a data reliability issue.)

    - Getting off the political, we find that Ngram thinks jazz began a steady decline in year 2000, as did disco music (20% decline in the five years 2002 to 2007, after an almost a 25-year-long steady appearance rate, 1979-2002). To finish up with two old ISteve standbys: Ngram believes golf courses peaked around year 2000 (or just before it) with steady decline after 2000; IQ tests, likewise, a 25% loss from 2000 to 2007. Plausible?

    - None of these (jazz, disco, golf courses, or IQ tests) were “uptrending” in the 2000s, of course, but there is also no reason to assume they would all begin to decline at the same time at such a stark rate. What may be going on is that they did maintain a ‘real’ usage rate in the 2000s that was about the same as immediately before, but the effect of the Internet is such that any word/phrase not growing would be shown to be declining.

    - The good news is: If my conjecture on Ngram ‘inflation’ for the 2000s is correct, it means the solid growth that Ngram attributes to ‘Steve Sailer‘ for the 2004 to 2007 period is actually a good deal higher than it appears. (I think an Ngram extended to 2017 for ‘Steve Sailer’ would be orders of magnitude higher still.) (Just for fun: “Ron Unz vs. Steve Sailer vs. John Derbyshire, 1990 to 2007.”)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. @Abe
    I read his article and this Hovater guy is a pretty fair writer! ("SJW's slimy tentacles", etc.) What are the chances he is or was a denizen of iSteve? I kind of like this Fausset guy too. Seems like a pretty standard-issue punk rock/post-hard core (or whatever it's called) Bernie Bro based on his allusions to The Minutemen and "the kind of man who starts a fire". Wants to understand, rather than reflexively denounce. Naively thinks our system of government should be about issues and not personalities, decided by a fair trial of ideas instead of whichever wannabe-mean girl and her cackling cabal of hens and simpering nancyboys is most adept at twisting the theatrics of democracy to its ends.

    Hovater interestingly calls himself a career social media villain. What are the chances he will pivot to completely embarrass his foes? People most triggered by this NYT profile are basically calling for his blood on account of the imminent Nazi threat Hovater represents. What if part of his plan to expose SJW's bloodthirsty hypocrisy is transitioning to some much more innocuous political identity as part of his ongoing political education?

    I think Ngram works fine through 2007, but not through 2008, when they must have stopped collecting data partway through the year. You have to turn off the smoothing by setting it to zero.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. Svigor says:

    I know some alt-right types like to groundlessly accuse all sorts of non-Jewish people (e.g. George Zimmerman) of being ((( Jewish))) but this is really a big stretch. If he was a Jewish anti-Semite he was a very, very confused guy like the blind black white-supremacist in the Chapelle sketch:

    You mean like the crypto-Jew who headed a Nazi organization, of Skokie Nazi fame?

    A very, very, confused guy, like, say, a schizo from a schizo family who drove a car into a crowd and is currently trying to cop an insanity plea?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  240. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Thomas

    That being said, if our main concern here is not Fields’s legal guilt, but whether or not Heather Heyer might still be alive today if things were different, then her decision to do something stupid and dangerous while being obese certainly does come into it.
     
    The completely blameless murder victim is a rarity, and also utterly unnecessary to holding a murderer accountable.

    But you’ll notice that nobody actually cares. Heather Heyer is like the white Trayvon. Nobody cared about him while he was alive either, so nobody was really all that sad that he died. She, like Trayvon, is more valuable to them as a symbol of the evils of white racism now that she’s dead than she ever would have been if she survived.
     
    George Zimmerman was of course acquitted, because there was sufficient evidence demonstrating that Trayvon Martin was attacking him and could have killed him. I doubt James Alex Fields will be able to claim anything similar regarding Heather Heyer.

    Last thing I'll say about this is that I really wish people would reflect a little more before they'd adopt Fields as a martyr or engage in these lame, tortured conspiracy theories about heart attacks. It sounds like nothing so much as an echo of SJWs adopting Trayvon or "Big Mike" Brown as innocent martyrs, the alt-right equivalent of "hands up, don't shoot," or (as Jack D suggested) Muslims trying to spin away responsibility for 9/11.

    utterly unnecessary to holding a murderer accountable.

    Is there a reason you keep harping on this after I already agreed?

    I doubt James Alex Fields will be able to claim anything similar regarding Heather Heyer.

    He also didn’t put a bullet through the heart of Heather Heyer from a foot or so away.

    It sounds like nothing so much as an echo of SJWs adopting Trayvon or “Big Mike” Brown as innocent martyrs, the alt-right equivalent of “hands up, don’t shoot,” or (as Jack D suggested) Muslims trying to spin away responsibility for 9/11.

    Fine, fine. Whatever.

    What I will continue to point out, however, is that James Fields did something that many, many people sympathized with, right up until this past August.

    I already pointed this out before, but I’ll go ahead and provide some links.

    Running over protesters blocking traffic is as American as apple pie. This is an automotive culture, and there’s something so infuriating about idiots blocking traffic that a lot of people can’t even articulate it.

    Now, does that make it right? I don’t know. But like I said, just read the comments on those. Every single one of them sympathizes with the driver.

    Do the people watching those videos seem to be reacting the way they would react if they were witnessing a terror attack, or even an attempted murder? Nope.

    And there are dozens more videos, just like those.

    So I have to say, I find it highly comical that all of a sudden, everyone thinks driving over protesters is just the worst, most unforgivable thing to do, just because an eeebil Notsie did it.

    So perhaps people aren’t defending him because he’s an “alt-right” martyr. Some of them are, sure. But some of them are just reacting the way all those other thousands of people reacted prior to this past summer, when other people did the exact same thing (some of whom, like in the first video, don’t even have the excuse of being in the middle of a riot), before the media convinced them, and you, that blocking traffic in the middle of a dangerous situation was a totally acceptable thing to do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    It's one of the flukes of our system of criminal law that the degree of crime (and thus the resulting punishment) often depends on what happens to the victims, even if your behavior and intent is exactly the same. You shoot at someone and they don't die - this is attempted murder and gets you a few years. The bullet is a few inches to the right and they die - now it's murder and you are looking at the death penalty. An old man confuses the gas and the brake and plows thru some empty tables at a flea market - no charges will be filed. Same guy hits a few shoppers but there are no serious injuries - reckless driving and probation. Same guy but someone dies - vehicular homicide and probably imprisonment.

    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields's conduct didn't) then it would be comparable. But once someone dies, it's a whole different ballgame.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Cagey Beast
    I can't add anything to my earlier comment to help you.

    They still do when it’s a matter of attacking America. Of course that makes anyone who agrees a Nazi when the time comes to denounce him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. Jack D says:
    @anon
    utterly unnecessary to holding a murderer accountable.

    Is there a reason you keep harping on this after I already agreed?

    I doubt James Alex Fields will be able to claim anything similar regarding Heather Heyer.

    He also didn't put a bullet through the heart of Heather Heyer from a foot or so away.

    It sounds like nothing so much as an echo of SJWs adopting Trayvon or “Big Mike” Brown as innocent martyrs, the alt-right equivalent of “hands up, don’t shoot,” or (as Jack D suggested) Muslims trying to spin away responsibility for 9/11.

    Fine, fine. Whatever.

    What I will continue to point out, however, is that James Fields did something that many, many people sympathized with, right up until this past August.

    I already pointed this out before, but I'll go ahead and provide some links.

    https://youtu.be/18q8lnpCPq4

    https://youtu.be/991jkBCwnAE

    https://youtu.be/nLExMuCGdOU

    Running over protesters blocking traffic is as American as apple pie. This is an automotive culture, and there's something so infuriating about idiots blocking traffic that a lot of people can't even articulate it.

    Now, does that make it right? I don't know. But like I said, just read the comments on those. Every single one of them sympathizes with the driver.

    Do the people watching those videos seem to be reacting the way they would react if they were witnessing a terror attack, or even an attempted murder? Nope.

    And there are dozens more videos, just like those.

    So I have to say, I find it highly comical that all of a sudden, everyone thinks driving over protesters is just the worst, most unforgivable thing to do, just because an eeebil Notsie did it.

    So perhaps people aren't defending him because he's an "alt-right" martyr. Some of them are, sure. But some of them are just reacting the way all those other thousands of people reacted prior to this past summer, when other people did the exact same thing (some of whom, like in the first video, don't even have the excuse of being in the middle of a riot), before the media convinced them, and you, that blocking traffic in the middle of a dangerous situation was a totally acceptable thing to do.

    It’s one of the flukes of our system of criminal law that the degree of crime (and thus the resulting punishment) often depends on what happens to the victims, even if your behavior and intent is exactly the same. You shoot at someone and they don’t die – this is attempted murder and gets you a few years. The bullet is a few inches to the right and they die – now it’s murder and you are looking at the death penalty. An old man confuses the gas and the brake and plows thru some empty tables at a flea market – no charges will be filed. Same guy hits a few shoppers but there are no serious injuries – reckless driving and probation. Same guy but someone dies – vehicular homicide and probably imprisonment.

    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields’s conduct didn’t) then it would be comparable. But once someone dies, it’s a whole different ballgame.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ano
    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields’s conduct didn’t) then it would be comparable.

    Nice try. The guy in the second video was explicitly NOT charged. With anything.

    Sure, nobody died. But he is CLEARLY committing assault. Indisputably. Unmistakably. And again. He doesn't even have the excuse that he MIGHT have feared for his life. He just endangered all of those people because he got impatient.

    And I'm not even really talking about the legal system. Not just them, anyway.

    When EVERY SINGLE PERSON who sees an act treats it like a joke at worst, and completely justified at best, you have to wonder what's going on when another guy does literally the same thing and becomes Public Enemy #1.

    Now, in your case, we know why. You're Jewish, and you think that anyone who criticizes Jews, like James Fields, must be stamped out. You already said so in the last thread about the eeeevil Notsie drummer.

    That's fine. At least you admit it. Nobody would expect you to be concerned with fairness or honesty or proportionality.

    That's why, even now, you don't express any type of outrage over any of the other drivers in the other videos. Those people aren't people you consider enemies, so you don't care how many people they run over.

    And like I said, who would expect anything different? But it's still rather humorous to watch it happen en masse.

    , @Johann Ricke

    It’s one of the flukes of our system of criminal law that the degree of crime (and thus the resulting punishment) often depends on what happens to the victims, even if your behavior and intent is exactly the same. You shoot at someone and they don’t die – this is attempted murder and gets you a few years.
     
    The Singapore government appears to have a pretty draconian view of gun-related offenses. From a Google search of somewhat recent news:

    Under Section 4 (1) of the Arms Offences Act, any person who is convicted of using or attempting to use any firearm faces the death penalty. The case will be mentioned again on June 29.
     
    I wonder what their view is of knife-related offenses.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. ano says:
    @Jack D
    It's one of the flukes of our system of criminal law that the degree of crime (and thus the resulting punishment) often depends on what happens to the victims, even if your behavior and intent is exactly the same. You shoot at someone and they don't die - this is attempted murder and gets you a few years. The bullet is a few inches to the right and they die - now it's murder and you are looking at the death penalty. An old man confuses the gas and the brake and plows thru some empty tables at a flea market - no charges will be filed. Same guy hits a few shoppers but there are no serious injuries - reckless driving and probation. Same guy but someone dies - vehicular homicide and probably imprisonment.

    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields's conduct didn't) then it would be comparable. But once someone dies, it's a whole different ballgame.

    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields’s conduct didn’t) then it would be comparable.

    Nice try. The guy in the second video was explicitly NOT charged. With anything.

    Sure, nobody died. But he is CLEARLY committing assault. Indisputably. Unmistakably. And again. He doesn’t even have the excuse that he MIGHT have feared for his life. He just endangered all of those people because he got impatient.

    And I’m not even really talking about the legal system. Not just them, anyway.

    When EVERY SINGLE PERSON who sees an act treats it like a joke at worst, and completely justified at best, you have to wonder what’s going on when another guy does literally the same thing and becomes Public Enemy #1.

    Now, in your case, we know why. You’re Jewish, and you think that anyone who criticizes Jews, like James Fields, must be stamped out. You already said so in the last thread about the eeeevil Notsie drummer.

    That’s fine. At least you admit it. Nobody would expect you to be concerned with fairness or honesty or proportionality.

    That’s why, even now, you don’t express any type of outrage over any of the other drivers in the other videos. Those people aren’t people you consider enemies, so you don’t care how many people they run over.

    And like I said, who would expect anything different? But it’s still rather humorous to watch it happen en masse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Watch the video. The guy in the 2nd video was not charged because nothing happened. He drives at low speed toward a handful of protesters who are blocking the road , the protesters have plenty of time to step aside and bang on his hood and then he drives on. No one got hurt. Not a scratch, except maybe to his paint. If Fields did this, he wouldn't have been charged either, Nazi or no.

    But instead he charged at a thick crowd at high speed with his souped up dragster and sending bodies flying and killed someone. So he is in jail awaiting trial and hopefully he will be a really old man before he gets out, if ever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. @Jack D
    It's one of the flukes of our system of criminal law that the degree of crime (and thus the resulting punishment) often depends on what happens to the victims, even if your behavior and intent is exactly the same. You shoot at someone and they don't die - this is attempted murder and gets you a few years. The bullet is a few inches to the right and they die - now it's murder and you are looking at the death penalty. An old man confuses the gas and the brake and plows thru some empty tables at a flea market - no charges will be filed. Same guy hits a few shoppers but there are no serious injuries - reckless driving and probation. Same guy but someone dies - vehicular homicide and probably imprisonment.

    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields's conduct didn't) then it would be comparable. But once someone dies, it's a whole different ballgame.

    It’s one of the flukes of our system of criminal law that the degree of crime (and thus the resulting punishment) often depends on what happens to the victims, even if your behavior and intent is exactly the same. You shoot at someone and they don’t die – this is attempted murder and gets you a few years.

    The Singapore government appears to have a pretty draconian view of gun-related offenses. From a Google search of somewhat recent news:

    Under Section 4 (1) of the Arms Offences Act, any person who is convicted of using or attempting to use any firearm faces the death penalty. The case will be mentioned again on June 29.

    I wonder what their view is of knife-related offenses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. Jack D says:
    @ano
    If those incidents you showed resulting in death (or if Fields’s conduct didn’t) then it would be comparable.

    Nice try. The guy in the second video was explicitly NOT charged. With anything.

    Sure, nobody died. But he is CLEARLY committing assault. Indisputably. Unmistakably. And again. He doesn't even have the excuse that he MIGHT have feared for his life. He just endangered all of those people because he got impatient.

    And I'm not even really talking about the legal system. Not just them, anyway.

    When EVERY SINGLE PERSON who sees an act treats it like a joke at worst, and completely justified at best, you have to wonder what's going on when another guy does literally the same thing and becomes Public Enemy #1.

    Now, in your case, we know why. You're Jewish, and you think that anyone who criticizes Jews, like James Fields, must be stamped out. You already said so in the last thread about the eeeevil Notsie drummer.

    That's fine. At least you admit it. Nobody would expect you to be concerned with fairness or honesty or proportionality.

    That's why, even now, you don't express any type of outrage over any of the other drivers in the other videos. Those people aren't people you consider enemies, so you don't care how many people they run over.

    And like I said, who would expect anything different? But it's still rather humorous to watch it happen en masse.

    Watch the video. The guy in the 2nd video was not charged because nothing happened. He drives at low speed toward a handful of protesters who are blocking the road , the protesters have plenty of time to step aside and bang on his hood and then he drives on. No one got hurt. Not a scratch, except maybe to his paint. If Fields did this, he wouldn’t have been charged either, Nazi or no.

    But instead he charged at a thick crowd at high speed with his souped up dragster and sending bodies flying and killed someone. So he is in jail awaiting trial and hopefully he will be a really old man before he gets out, if ever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Watch the video. The guy in the 2nd video was not charged because nothing happened.

    Sure it did. A guy drove his pickup truck into people. Last time I checked, a car is a deadly weapon, is it not?

    If a guy fires his gun into a crowd, but miraculously doesn't hit anybody, do they let him go, because "nothing happened"?

    He drives at low speed toward a handful of protesters who are blocking the road

    There's no safe speed at which to run someone over with a pickup truck. I think the law will back me up on that.

    And I will remind you, once again, that that guy had literally no reason to do it. He could have just called the cops and waited. He could have just backed up his truck and gone a different way. He wasn't in any danger. He committed several counts of assault just because he didnit feel like waiting. You're OK with that, right?

    If one of those people had been a feeble woman, who fell over and cracked her skull open on the pavement, would you be telling me that that guy deserved to go to prison for the rest of his life? That's what your "eggshell principle" would say. But you can't seriously expect me to believe that you actually would say that.

    But instead he charged at a thick crowd at high speed with his souped up dragster and sending bodies flying and killed someone.

    Lots and lots of people went flying in that first video. You outraged about that? No. You're not. Because you're Jewish and those guys aren't Notsies. Face it.

    So he is in jail awaiting trial and hopefully he will be a really old man before he gets out, if ever.

    Yet none of the people in the first video are going to be in prison until they're really old men. Not one of them. You're not outraged about that.

    Well, suppose that landwhale you like so much had taken her weak heart to one of THOSE protests instead of to the one in Charlottesville. Then THAT person would be a murderer, and James Fields would be the star of a hilarious viral video. Right?

    So, basically, what you're arguing is that I should be outraged because a morbidly obese woman went to HIS rally, and not to one of the BLM rallies in the first one.

    What you are claiming is, the only thing separating the star of a comedic viral video and a public menace who deserves life in prison is how close they are to fat women.

    Does that honestly make any sense to you? Why can't you just say "I am outraged about James Fields, and not outraged about people running over BLM protesters because I am Jewish, and more concerned about the enemies of my tribe than I am about any sort of public safety concerns.".

    Especially since you already did admit it in the other threat about the drummer. Does it just not sound so good when you put it like that?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Jack D
    Watch the video. The guy in the 2nd video was not charged because nothing happened. He drives at low speed toward a handful of protesters who are blocking the road , the protesters have plenty of time to step aside and bang on his hood and then he drives on. No one got hurt. Not a scratch, except maybe to his paint. If Fields did this, he wouldn't have been charged either, Nazi or no.

    But instead he charged at a thick crowd at high speed with his souped up dragster and sending bodies flying and killed someone. So he is in jail awaiting trial and hopefully he will be a really old man before he gets out, if ever.

    Watch the video. The guy in the 2nd video was not charged because nothing happened.

    Sure it did. A guy drove his pickup truck into people. Last time I checked, a car is a deadly weapon, is it not?

    If a guy fires his gun into a crowd, but miraculously doesn’t hit anybody, do they let him go, because “nothing happened”?

    He drives at low speed toward a handful of protesters who are blocking the road

    There’s no safe speed at which to run someone over with a pickup truck. I think the law will back me up on that.

    And I will remind you, once again, that that guy had literally no reason to do it. He could have just called the cops and waited. He could have just backed up his truck and gone a different way. He wasn’t in any danger. He committed several counts of assault just because he didnit feel like waiting. You’re OK with that, right?

    If one of those people had been a feeble woman, who fell over and cracked her skull open on the pavement, would you be telling me that that guy deserved to go to prison for the rest of his life? That’s what your “eggshell principle” would say. But you can’t seriously expect me to believe that you actually would say that.

    But instead he charged at a thick crowd at high speed with his souped up dragster and sending bodies flying and killed someone.

    Lots and lots of people went flying in that first video. You outraged about that? No. You’re not. Because you’re Jewish and those guys aren’t Notsies. Face it.

    So he is in jail awaiting trial and hopefully he will be a really old man before he gets out, if ever.

    Yet none of the people in the first video are going to be in prison until they’re really old men. Not one of them. You’re not outraged about that.

    Well, suppose that landwhale you like so much had taken her weak heart to one of THOSE protests instead of to the one in Charlottesville. Then THAT person would be a murderer, and James Fields would be the star of a hilarious viral video. Right?

    So, basically, what you’re arguing is that I should be outraged because a morbidly obese woman went to HIS rally, and not to one of the BLM rallies in the first one.

    What you are claiming is, the only thing separating the star of a comedic viral video and a public menace who deserves life in prison is how close they are to fat women.

    Does that honestly make any sense to you? Why can’t you just say “I am outraged about James Fields, and not outraged about people running over BLM protesters because I am Jewish, and more concerned about the enemies of my tribe than I am about any sort of public safety concerns.”.

    Especially since you already did admit it in the other threat about the drummer. Does it just not sound so good when you put it like that?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. eah says:
    @eah
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPryMWvU8AEHITP.jpg

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

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
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?