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

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From Huffington Post:

Twitter Still Has A White Nationalist Problem

Almost 18 months after Twitter promised to crack down on hate, the platform teems with racist extremists.
By Luke O’Brien

… “Jack, just picking up on some of the questions flooding in,” Anderson said. “A lot of people [are] puzzled why, like, how hard is it to get rid of Nazis from Twitter?”

Dorsey, who became a billionaire by monetizing outrage online, laughed uncomfortably. Again with the Nazis? Dorsey has never had a good answer to this question. He still doesn’t.

“We have policies around violent and extremist groups,” he told the audience in Vancouver. “And the majority of our work and our terms of service works on conduct, not content. So we’re actually looking for conduct. So conduct being using the service to periodically or episodically to harass someone, using hateful imagery that might be associated with the KKK or the American Nazi Party. Those are all things that we act on immediately.” …

Toward the end of April, it became clear why, as Dorsey slouched into the Oval Office to meet his most controversial customer.

President Donald Trump is the abuser-in-chief on Twitter.

President Trump routinely violates Twitter policies against abuse and harassment, uses the service to whip up his racist followers and retweets white nationalists like Lauren Southern. Twitter permits this behavior out of what it calls, in an Orwellian twist, a concern for the “public interest.”…

On Twitter, Trump raged about the Facebook bans.

“I am continuing to monitor the censorship of AMERICAN CITIZENS on social media platforms,” he wrote. “This is the United States of America — and we have what’s known as FREEDOM OF SPEECH! We are monitoring and watching, closely!!”

To reinforce his point, Trump retweeted Canadian white nationalist Lauren Southern and British fake news merchant Paul Joseph Watson, one of the extremists banned by Facebook. The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by social media companies ― a distinction seemingly lost on Trump.

Okay, let’s get to the Blacklist:

… WHITE NATIONALISTS ON TWITTER
Though these accounts are easily discoverable on Twitter, publishing their names could bring them more attention. For that reason, HuffPost is only publishing their user IDs, not the @ “handles” most commonly associated with Twitter accounts.

Since we began assembling this list last month, four of the 62 accounts have been suspended. Two were not suspended but appear to have self-deleted to evade oversight. We are leaving these accounts on the list because Twitter permitted the suspended users to repeatedly post extremist content before taking action and seemingly took no action against users that deactivated their accounts. …

Steve Sailer

Steve Sailer is a former National Review writer who popularized the term “human bio-diversity” ― another name for scientific racism ― and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.” Sailer, whom Richard Spencer credits with helping “redpill” him, currently writes for The Unz Review and routinely demeans people of color. Following Hurricane Katrina, Sailer wrote that African Americans “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.” He repeated the same sentiment after Hurricane Maria with regard to Puerto Ricans, thousands of whom the Trump administration left to die.

And if you can’t trust the Huffington Post’s Blacklist, you can clearly trust the Hereditary Editor-in-Chief of Commentary:

You can get much more reprllent than making fun of Harvey Weinstein.

 
Hide 273 CommentsLeave a Comment
273 Comments to "The Blacklist"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Man, Steve, I didn’t know you were a dangerous extremist, and I’ve been reading you since two decades! I guess I’m not good at reading between the lines of your wicked articles. LOL!

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I've never published.
    , @Simon Tugmutton
    You obviously haven't invested in a pair of Steve's Special Spectacles™ to read the 'invisible' pixels with the really, really noticing stuff. A snip at only $9.99 and available from all extremist businesses everywhere.
  2. “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”

    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!

    and routinely demeans people of color.

    Oh now that’s just wrong. Routinely? Before breakfast even? Is nothing sacred?

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk


    “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!
     
    Steve can't be an inventor. Inventors are black.
    , @David
    "Steve that kills me six or seven dozen tropes at breakfast, washes his hands, and says to his wife, 'Fye on this quiet life, I want work!'"
  3. @BB753
    Man, Steve, I didn't know you were a dangerous extremist, and I've been reading you since two decades! I guess I'm not good at reading between the lines of your wicked articles. LOL!

    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I’ve never published.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I’ve never published.
     
    And they have come to the attention of the Central Scrutinizer - the authority charged with enforcing those laws that have not yet been enacted.
    , @Ron Mexico
    Steve, When can we expect your Manifesto?
    , @Almost Missouri
    Actually, the remarkable thing is that with millions of words published, the Left still has to resort to that same old (and true) Hurricane Katrina story to "prove" you are a deplorable. I guess these Lefites don't read much. And/or they simply agreed at their Journolist meeting that this was going to be their go-to strategy when Sailer or HBD comes up.
    , @SFG
    Hey, all of mine pass the Bechdel test. ;)
    , @Father O'Hara
    But its your secret thoughts that interest the Party!
  4. I don’t know why Steve put that Titania, but I had a good laugh reading 3-4 messages on her account (I guess this is the name, I’m clueless about social media)

    Titania McGrath
    ‏ @TitaniaMcGrath
    20h20 hours ago

    Titania McGrath Retweeted Alyssa Milano

    The ultimate goal of feminism must be to eliminate the necessity for sexual intercourse.

    • Replies: @Splatter Over Spatter
    TitaniaMcGrath is a parody account. The sad thing is that nowadays it is very easy to believe that it is not.
    , @El Dato
    The lovable library wench with problem glasses is actually Andrew Doyle.

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/12/why-i-invented-titania-mcgrath/


    Last April, I decided to set up a satirical account on Twitter under the guise of radical intersectionalist poet Titania McGrath. She’s a po-faced young activist who, in spite of her immense privilege, is convinced that she is oppressed. She’s not a direct parody of an existing individual, but anyone who regularly reads opinion columns in the Guardian will be familiar with the type. Given that such individuals are seemingly impervious to reason, and would rather cry ‘bigot’ than engage in serious debate, satire seemed to be the only option.
     
    And:

    The problem is compounded because identitarians on both the right and the left typically believe themselves to be the underdogs, and are fuelled by a sense of grievance. In spite of the fact that we have a right-wing government, we should be in no doubt that woke politics is culturally dominant. I have previously argued that the notion of political correctness – a broadly agreed social contract that recognises that overt racism, sexism and homophobia are uncivil – is a laudable concept. Woke ideology has little to do with political correctness. It is about narrowing the Overton window, seeking out heretical opinions, and brutally punishing those who dare to think for themselves.
     
    And:

    Andrew Doyle is a stand-up comedian and spiked columnist.

    Woke: A Guide to Social Justice , by Titania McGrath, is published by Constable.
     

    , @flyingtiger
    I also read the twitter accounts. I have never laughed so hard. I presume that that"she" is a hoax to black wash the leftist and feminists. The real "Titania" is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.
  5. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a European face…forever.

    • Replies: @Lowe
    Orwell's vision of a possible dystopian future, a boot stamping on a face, presumably European, will not come to pass. The only people interested and capable of implementing this totalitarian "world of trampling and being trampled upon" are Europeans, who are vanishing demographically.

    Everyone else is either uninterested (East Asians) or inadequate to the task (Middle Easterners, Africans). What the future actually looks like is fairly libertarian, filled with dark-hued human bodies, an over-abundance of low quality labor, and such a scarcity of competence and idealogical passion that a 1984-style Inner Party is out of the question.
    , @Qft

    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a European face…forever.
     
  6. It’s not just HuffPost that knows what’s up. Check out CNN.

    TD is right. You people just can’t be trusted.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    Why don't the Republicans just ride into the sunset and die?

    Then one wouldn't have to COUNT the votes.
    , @Forbes
    Obviously the headline was edited due to space limitations. They meant to write:

    How the shady GOP's shady plan to help elect shady white Republicans works: It's shady.
     
  7. So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.

    • Replies: @Moses
    Would you mind defining “White Nationalist” with clear litmus tests?

    Let’s be clear what Steve is being accused of.
    , @Anonymous

    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.
     
    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?
  8. @Steve Sailer
    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I've never published.

    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I’ve never published.

    And they have come to the attention of the Central Scrutinizer – the authority charged with enforcing those laws that have not yet been enacted.

    • Replies: @Oswald Spengler
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljnT49jU9vM

    "This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER...it is my responsibility to enforce all the laws that haven't been passed yet. It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one of you to the potential consequences of various ordinary everyday activities you might be performing which could eventually lead to *The Death Penalty* (or affect your parents' credit rating)."
  9. The Blacklist

    Are you now, or have you ever been, a white nationalist? Can you name some names for us?

    • Replies: @anon
    Are you now, or have you ever been, skeptical about the more cultural and racial diversity within a nation, the merrier?
  10. According to the linked article, anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    ...anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    Well, my handbook says "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."

    , @bomag

    So how is this supposed to work?
     
    The ultimate in political power is getting your followers to believe lies, and crushing your opponents for uttering the truth.
    , @Kylie
    Facts are hateful and racist. Therefore fact-based science is the new junk science.
    , @Desiderius
    Lol.

    13th century sage: So if you burn down my city and everyone in it, how is that supposed to work?

    Genghis: Zing!

    , @anon
    Truth is no defence in this ol' po-mo world.
  11. Steve Sailer is a former National Review writer who popularized the term “human bio-diversity” ― another name for scientific racism ― and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”

    I am indeed humbled to have my comments accepted to appear alongside the works of one of our truly great modern thinkers.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Neuday
    Indeed, Steve isn't a White Nationalist, but he can see us from there.
    , @bored identity
    Speak for yourself.


    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.

    That's mostly because bored identity's white liver and blackened heart possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.
  12. You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.
     
    Indeed, one could employ that old go-to from the liberal play-book - asking how it is that the other person knows some particular hate-fact, as if the mere knowledge itself were some kind of crime. If some liberal happens to know about Steve Sailer or HBD, you could always ask him "How come you know about such things? Do you read unz.com? Why would you do that?"
    , @Yaacom

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.
     
    Patton Oswalt referenced isteve, betraying the fact that he was a regular reader of this blog. Since I believe Oswalt to be cynical and conniving, and his primary audiences are earnest and valiant SJW's, I was rather surprised he would make such a foolish misstep into his own shitty mire.

    SJW's are a shirt-sighted and cowardly lot, and the cowardly are often driven by superstition and fancy. Now, their Wizard had travelled to the dark forest, to return with his eyes a-glow, speaking in a dark forest dialect. His followers were not having it, and it blew delirious shit in his surprised, bloated twitter countenance for days.

    He never did it again! 😆
  13. Well if you constantly expand the definition of white supremacism, then I suppose liberal America does have a Neo-Nazi problem. Just about anyone to the right of the far left is now included in that ever increasing tent known as white nationalism. Even being black and a civic nationalist doesn’t exclude you from being a white nationalist:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-young-men-of-color-are-joining-white-supremacist-groups

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, I've seen the 'Nazi' label applied successively to Colin Jordan's British Movement, the National Front, the BNP, UKIP, and now Farage's Brexit Party.

    The first of these might actually have qualified. The NF and BNP were specifically self-described parties of and for Native British people, UKIP and Brexit Party are citizenist in quite a Sailerish way, both having a fair few minority candidates.

    The qualifications needed to be 'a Nazi' get less and less each year. It can't be long before not acknowledging White Privilege and White Guilt will be sufficient.

    Still, the strategy has been very effective.
  14. The Facehugger Post is again trying to un-exist badthinkers, wreckers and dangerous people and basically writing open letters to Jack The Twitter to help out? And publishes what amounts to a kill-list?

    Say it ain’t so!

    Oh man, that’s a long article.

    Social media platforms are private companies. They can regulate content and users how they see fit.

    Unless they regulate the left. Then they are companies profiting from tax cuts, NSA brown envelopes, access to movers & shakers and possibly gentrification.

    scientific racism

    I still don’t know whether that’s good or bad.

    Puerto Ricans, thousands of whom the Trump administration left to die

    It was basically Yemen all over again. As they said elsewhere:

    “Only Donald Trump could see the tragedy in Puerto Rico and conclude that he is the victim,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) wrote on Twitter. “May God bless the souls of the nearly 3,000 Americans that died in Puerto Rico and may he take pity on your soul Mr. President.”

    OT links:

    Lyon bomb blast suspect in custody, under formal investigation

    Police initially arrested the main suspect, a 24-year-old Algerian computer student, and three other people in connection with the case on Monday.

    The things IT nerds can do when they want to. Or is being an “IT student” the same as “working as a waiter” nowadays? It could well be!

    And also:

    Privacy? What’s that? Facebook lawyer argues users have none

    “You have to closely guard something to have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” Snyder explained, claiming that Facebook is merely a “digital town square” where users voluntarily dispense with any notion of privacy and any “reasonable Facebook user” would have been aware that third-party app-makers could access their data through friends’ activity.

    US District Court Judge Vince Chhabria pointed out that just last month, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was rapturously declaring “the future is private!” and announcing the company’s privacy-focused new direction – a far cry from Snyder’s scornful dismissal of the concept.

    • Replies: @Autochthon

    Toward the end of April, it became clear why, as Dorsey slouched into the Oval Office to meet his most controversial customer product.
     
    I've fixed this bit; the popularity of this stupidity is maddening. Donald Trump does not pay a dime to Twitter. Twitter makes money* from advertising (i.e., selling its users' attention) and by directly selling data about its users, mostly via application-programming interfaces (who they are, what they read, what they endorse, who they are connected to, etc.). In other words, the very people these dumbasses call Twitter's customers are in fact its products. Can you imagine a hooker being called a pimp's customer?! That's the level of stupidity (or, more likely, disingenuous evil) we are working with here, folks. Twitter's customer's are the likes of Coca-Cola and eMpTyVee (for advertising) and bastards like Snaptrends, Mention, Intutel, Awario, and Brandwatch (to collect obscene amount of data about you that you provided for free, then resell it at great profit).

    If you've never heard of the second lot, that is by design: the game only profits its organisers if indeed the products – Donald Trump, your Auntie Karen, whomever – believe they are some kind of "customer" being provided a service. This also leads to misguided expectations of privacy, rights in the platform, and so on.

    Sure, some clever folks – Donald Trump, Justin Beiber, Jojo Siwa – use these platforms to benefit themselves, but that's not to say even then that they are customers. At best they've achieved a coincidental symbiosis. Doing a Stupic Human Trick on Late Night might make you rich and famous, I guess, but Letterman's people didn't book you to advance your career – they booked you because they decided you would entice people to watch the show, in turn enabling them to sell advertising....

    *What money it does make; like many such outfits, it's mostly a giant bubble of speculation) from investments, rather than a going concern with revenue from products or services....

    , @bomag
    Thanks for the summary.

    Social media platforms are private companies. They can regulate content and users how they see fit.
     
    Laughable notion coming from the likes of HuffPo, who gleefully announce a state right to raid and arrest when it comes time to gleefully crush private companies who don't want to bake gay cakes, higher a particular person, etc. in a slight quest to regulate their content and users.
  15. You’re on the Naughty List.

    You’re my kind of people.

  16. @Mr McKenna

    “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!

    and routinely demeans people of color.
     
    Oh now that's just wrong. Routinely? Before breakfast even? Is nothing sacred?

    “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”

    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!

    Steve can’t be an inventor. Inventors are black.

    • LOL: jim jones, bomag
    • Replies: @Anon
    Well, at least this one was taken from the relatively sympathetic New York Magazine profile, not the SPLC website.
    , @Redneck farmer
    Naw, Buzz, Steve's an inventor. "Weaponized BadThink" isn't something African inventors couldn't have come up with, they're too nice and progressive. Also, meant to hit "LOL".
  17. Wow, Steve, you sound like a terrible person. Routinely demeaning people of color? Do you have, like, a calendar app that beeps at you when it’s demeaning time?

    • Replies: @Wille
    One would think that Specially demeaning people of color merits a lower level of hell than merely Routinely demeaning them. Are they implying Steve is too lazy to put the effort into finding new ways to demean?
  18. Anonymous[112] • Disclaimer says:

    ‘Thousands of whom the Trump Administration left to die’.

    Good Lord! I never knew that Pol Pot was occupying the Whitehouse!

    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    ‘Thousands of whom the Trump Administration left to die’.

    Good Lord! I never knew that Pol Pot was occupying the Whitehouse!"


    I thought that Trump was literally Hitler?? The Fuhrer would never leave his enemies to die, but instead order their execution.
  19. @Peter Johnson
    According to the linked article, anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    …anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    Well, my handbook says “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

  20. @Mr. Anon
    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn't a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.

    Would you mind defining “White Nationalist” with clear litmus tests?

    Let’s be clear what Steve is being accused of.

  21. @unpc downunder
    Well if you constantly expand the definition of white supremacism, then I suppose liberal America does have a Neo-Nazi problem. Just about anyone to the right of the far left is now included in that ever increasing tent known as white nationalism. Even being black and a civic nationalist doesn't exclude you from being a white nationalist:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-young-men-of-color-are-joining-white-supremacist-groups

    In the UK, I’ve seen the ‘Nazi’ label applied successively to Colin Jordan’s British Movement, the National Front, the BNP, UKIP, and now Farage’s Brexit Party.

    The first of these might actually have qualified. The NF and BNP were specifically self-described parties of and for Native British people, UKIP and Brexit Party are citizenist in quite a Sailerish way, both having a fair few minority candidates.

    The qualifications needed to be ‘a Nazi’ get less and less each year. It can’t be long before not acknowledging White Privilege and White Guilt will be sufficient.

    Still, the strategy has been very effective.

    • Replies: @BengaliCanadianDude
    Exactly, and Nigel Farage is so NOT white nationalist it's quite hilarious actually/ He has said so many things that would contradict that if he were. Plus, there is Raheem Kassam in UKIP(certified muppet)
  22. You’ll never live down that hurricane stuff.

  23. @Buzz Mohawk


    “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!
     
    Steve can't be an inventor. Inventors are black.

    Well, at least this one was taken from the relatively sympathetic New York Magazine profile, not the SPLC website.

  24. > Following Hurricane Katrina, Sailer wrote that African Americans “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.”

    What? Why would anybody say anything like that? Now that this calumny has been brought to the attention of HuffPo readers, it’s ripe for rebuttal.

    C’mon, fellow ultraliberal progressive HuffPo readers, we need to contribute a slew of investigative reporting articles to show how Hurricane Katrina didn’t highlight the idea that urban welfare class Americans possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    Cellphone video footage taken last Saturday night at Baltimore’s Inner Harbor makes the same point (that urban welfare class Americans don’t possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and don’t need stricter moral guidance from society).

    All praise to HuffPo editors for empowering us Outer Party members to take the fight to the White Nationalist enemy!

    • Replies: @anon
    When you're on the street and see or hear disturbing, seemingly aggressive behaviour from a distance or from behind you, your hackles rise. Then you see that the source is from a person with Down Syndrome, and you immediately soften and feel nothing but sympathy and benevolence. The MSM has the same reaction to blacks and Muslims.
    , @AnotherDad


    Following Hurricane Katrina, Sailer wrote that African Americans “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.”
     
    What? Why would anybody say anything like that? Now that this calumny has been brought to the attention of HuffPo readers, it’s ripe for rebuttal.

    C’mon, fellow ultraliberal progressive HuffPo readers, we need to contribute a slew of investigative reporting articles to show how Hurricane Katrina didn’t highlight the idea that urban welfare class Americans possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.
     
    This.

    I think HuffPoers are correct that their cause--establishment minoritarianism/anti-whitism--benefits if they can ban Steve from Twitter.

    However, it's probably very bad for their cause to publish articles that call attention to Steve and quote him. This is one of these--quite common--cases where progs steeped in their prog world view, point and sputter at stuff ("I can't even!) that is just so obviously outrageous, to them, but isn't necessarily going to give normal people, who haven't drunk their Kool Aid, the vapors.

    Steve's Katrina comment is certainly outside current standards (i.e. PC) of establishment discourse. But if sometime hears it--particularly someone who remembers those scenes from Katrina, or some other event involving mass black behavior--Steve's comment isn't going to seem outrageous at all, and might just pique interest.
  25. I wish @RealPresidentDonaldTrump would walk the walk the way he tweets the tweet.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    I wish @RealPresidentDonaldTrump would walk the walk the way he tweets the tweet.
     
    It's almost as if he's just a cynical opportunist whore.
  26. @Bardon Kaldian
    I don't know why Steve put that Titania, but I had a good laugh reading 3-4 messages on her account (I guess this is the name, I'm clueless about social media)


    Titania McGrath
    ‏ @TitaniaMcGrath
    20h20 hours ago

    Titania McGrath Retweeted Alyssa Milano

    The ultimate goal of feminism must be to eliminate the necessity for sexual intercourse.

    TitaniaMcGrath is a parody account. The sad thing is that nowadays it is very easy to believe that it is not.

  27. @Bardon Kaldian
    I don't know why Steve put that Titania, but I had a good laugh reading 3-4 messages on her account (I guess this is the name, I'm clueless about social media)


    Titania McGrath
    ‏ @TitaniaMcGrath
    20h20 hours ago

    Titania McGrath Retweeted Alyssa Milano

    The ultimate goal of feminism must be to eliminate the necessity for sexual intercourse.

    The lovable library wench with problem glasses is actually Andrew Doyle.

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/12/why-i-invented-titania-mcgrath/

    Last April, I decided to set up a satirical account on Twitter under the guise of radical intersectionalist poet Titania McGrath. She’s a po-faced young activist who, in spite of her immense privilege, is convinced that she is oppressed. She’s not a direct parody of an existing individual, but anyone who regularly reads opinion columns in the Guardian will be familiar with the type. Given that such individuals are seemingly impervious to reason, and would rather cry ‘bigot’ than engage in serious debate, satire seemed to be the only option.

    And:

    The problem is compounded because identitarians on both the right and the left typically believe themselves to be the underdogs, and are fuelled by a sense of grievance. In spite of the fact that we have a right-wing government, we should be in no doubt that woke politics is culturally dominant. I have previously argued that the notion of political correctness – a broadly agreed social contract that recognises that overt racism, sexism and homophobia are uncivil – is a laudable concept. Woke ideology has little to do with political correctness. It is about narrowing the Overton window, seeking out heretical opinions, and brutally punishing those who dare to think for themselves.

    And:

    Andrew Doyle is a stand-up comedian and spiked columnist.

    Woke: A Guide to Social Justice , by Titania McGrath, is published by Constable.

  28. Steve, I couldn’t tell for sure from the way you pasted in the excerpts: Is “Steve Sailer” (just like that) your twitter ID? They mention not publishing these truth-tellers bad person’s handles to avoid giving them publicity. Is your handle the same, but without spaces, or something? In other words, is that excerpt directly from the Huff-Po blacklist?

    (I gotta say, I hate this Huff-Post Orwellian stuff, but I one thing I like is the word “handle” from back in the days of CB radio. “What’s your handle, Good Buddy? This is the Rubber Duck, you got a copy on me? C’mon back with that”)

    Congratulations are due, anyway!

    • Replies: @dr kill
    This here's the Tiny Ducky, got your ears on, Lenny?
  29. @Mr McKenna
    It's not just HuffPost that knows what's up. Check out CNN.

    https://i.ibb.co/G3gT2q8/CNN-2019-06-01-03-02-04.png

    TD is right. You people just can't be trusted.

    Why don’t the Republicans just ride into the sunset and die?

    Then one wouldn’t have to COUNT the votes.

  30. “Steve Sailer is a former National Review writer who popularized the term “human bio-diversity” ― another name for scientific racism ― and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.””

    Actually, Steve did neither of those. A black woman in his basement came up with both.

    • LOL: Kylie
    • Replies: @bored identity
    For the record, bored identity is here only for that Salieri guy's movie reviews..., and golf.

    And, what is Tweerter?
  31. Funny how they don’t blame you for the Sailer Strategy. Using the Sailer Strategy, Trump turned their universe upside down by winning the presidency in his first shot at elected office … but it doesn’t merit a mention? Boy, is their side stupid!

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @MEH 0910

    Funny how they don’t blame you for the Sailer Strategy.
     
    They provide a link to a piece about Steve that mentions the Sailer Strategy:

    and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/04/steve-sailer-invented-identity-politics-for-the-alt-right.html

    The Trump strategy looked an awful lot like the Sailer Strategy: the divisive but influential idea that the GOP could run up the electoral score by winning over working-class whites on issues like immigration, first proposed by the conservative writer Steve Sailer in 2000, and summarily rejected by establishment Republicans at the time. Now, 17 years and four presidential cycles later, Sailer, once made a pariah by mainstream conservatives, has quietly become one of the most influential thinkers on the American right.
     
  32. “Blacklist” – Sounds racist.

  33. Quote from a comment of mine made maybe 12 hours ago:

    “I saw Steve mentioned in the HuffPost as someone who ought to be banned from Twitter for “hatred” or sumpin’”.

    “I dunno–in my opinion much of Steve’s “noticing” amounts to clever and satirical observations on the hatred and contempt visited upon White folks by the mainstream media. Steve seems to me something like a journalistic and more literate variant of Richard Pryor and his send-ups of White folks’ behavior.”

    There’s neither oxygen nor light in the minds of the goodthinkers, but maybe Steve can get a friendly English prof to show how his writing fits comfortably within the tradition of criticizing the powerful and celebrated through mockery.

  34. Anon[242] • Disclaimer says:

    The HuffPo article had this to say about one of its targets:

    British YouTube vlogger Tara McCarthy … has, for example, called black people a separate “subspecies” and said that whites could “arguably be considered a separate species.” Humans cannot be distinguished genetically by race.

    The link goes to an article about her that has this quote:

    He also noted that geneticists measure population differentiation with something called a fixation index (or FST) score. This score ranges from 0 to 1 with 1 being a “completely different species.”

    For geneticists, a mammalian population would have to have a score of 0.30 to be considered a true subspecies or races,” said Dr. Sussman. “Different coyotes have a score of 0.40, and chimpanzee populations have a score of around 0.70 in the measurement of population genetic differentiation. Humans only have a score of 0.156.”

    The other day Steve posted this:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/big-if-true/

    Our estimates on human datasets reveal a complex population structure driven by founder effects due to dispersal from Africa and admixture. Notably, our new approach estimates larger FST values of 26% for native worldwide human populations and 23% for admixed Hispanic individuals, whereas the existing approach estimates 9.8% and 2.6%, respectively.

    So you need an FST of 0.30 to be a subspecies or race. Humans only differ by 26 percent, presumably and FST of 0.26, if I understand it correctly.

    So we’re safe. Keep on walking. No subpecies to see here. There is still 0.04 separating us.

  35. That Facehugger Post hit-piece was written by “Luke O’Brien, Senior Reporter, HuffPost”

    But here is something more:

    It’s Not Your Imagination: The Journalists Writing About Antifa Are Often Their Cheerleaders

    Christopher Mathias, a senior reporter for the Huffington Post, applies the same cynical approach. Like Wilson, Mathias’ byline seems to pop up whenever Antifa stages violent protests—and he always can be counted on to deliver a play-by-play that favors Antifa. But he goes even further than his Guardian counterpart [Jason Wilson ]. Unlike Wilson, Mathias actually doxes individuals whom he suspects of being right-wing extremists. His doxing sources for an article about suspected extremists in the U.S. military included Unicorn Riot, an anarchic Antifa journalist collective, and other shady sites that exist as a sort of in-house 4chan for the Antifa movement. (Mathias cited similar sources when he published identifying details of a Texas schoolteacher, and of a Virginia police officer.)

    Mathias’ apparent modus operandi is to gather doxes of individuals whom Antifa or Antifa-friendly groups suspect of being right-wing extremists. He (or a colleague) at Huffington Post then reach out to the target’s employer asking for comment, leveraging the media outlet’s name to ensure the individual is called out. Then Mathias posts the doxes in his column while investigations are ongoing. As with Emily Gorcenski’s First Vigil site, Mathias broadcasts detailed personal information whose release seems designed to destroy the reputation of the accused, no matter the results of any subsequent investigation. It’s unclear how this behavior differs from ordinary, everyday Antifa-style online activism.

    White Helmets and Antifa are two sides of the same coin.

    • Replies: @Ragno
    Alas, Twitter lost no time in permabanning the man who connected the dots:

    Twitter has suspended the account of Eoin Lenihan, a researcher who mapped out connections between mainstream journalists and the violent far-left Antifa movement on Twitter, following a mass-reporting campaign by left-wing activists.
     
    Naturally, all of the charts and graphs with which Lenihan connected the breadcrumb trail have now been removed as well.

    If a tree falls in the forest, and Chase Manhattan Bank closes the accounts of anyone in earshot....did it really fall at all?
  36. “Twitter permits this behavior out of what it calls, in an Orwellian twist, a concern for the “public interest.”… ”

    I like the way they use ‘Orwellian’–to complain that people they don’t like are allowed free speech. Being able to hear the opinions of the president certainly seems like the public interest to me.

  37. To reinforce his point, Trump retweeted Canadian white nationalist Lauren Southern…

    The American news media has beat the drum since 2015 that Trump is under the undue influence of foreign agents, creating an enduring aspect of Trump Derangement Syndrome in the minds of millions of people worldwide that is evidence-proof. Isn’t that right Mueller? Mueller? MUELLER?

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    I have a buddy who matched with her on Tinder.

    It is pretty cool... but at the same time she should be making white babies, not whoring around on Tinder. You know that's what she does... goes and does her documentary, then "enjoys" the men of whatever country she's visiting.
  38. @Mr McKenna

    “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!

    and routinely demeans people of color.
     
    Oh now that's just wrong. Routinely? Before breakfast even? Is nothing sacred?

    “Steve that kills me six or seven dozen tropes at breakfast, washes his hands, and says to his wife, ‘Fye on this quiet life, I want work!’”

    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    Boom, chilled.
  39. @Steve Sailer
    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I've never published.

    Steve, When can we expect your Manifesto?

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter
    Just before he goes on a mass shooting spree?
  40. @Anonymous
    'Thousands of whom the Trump Administration left to die'.

    Good Lord! I never knew that Pol Pot was occupying the Whitehouse!

    ‘Thousands of whom the Trump Administration left to die’.

    Good Lord! I never knew that Pol Pot was occupying the Whitehouse!”

    I thought that Trump was literally Hitler?? The Fuhrer would never leave his enemies to die, but instead order their execution.

  41. I’ve been reading you at least since the early aughts, and you’re one of the least hateful people in our public discourse. But I remember reading the “poorer native judgment” line when you first published it and thinking that, because it’s so easily quotable, it would probably prevent you from ever getting back into mainstream outlets.

    If you had it to do over again…?

  42. @Peter Johnson
    According to the linked article, anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    So how is this supposed to work?

    The ultimate in political power is getting your followers to believe lies, and crushing your opponents for uttering the truth.

  43. @El Dato
    The Facehugger Post is again trying to un-exist badthinkers, wreckers and dangerous people and basically writing open letters to Jack The Twitter to help out? And publishes what amounts to a kill-list?

    Say it ain't so!

    Oh man, that's a long article.

    Social media platforms are private companies. They can regulate content and users how they see fit.
     
    Unless they regulate the left. Then they are companies profiting from tax cuts, NSA brown envelopes, access to movers & shakers and possibly gentrification.

    scientific racism
     
    I still don't know whether that's good or bad.

    Puerto Ricans, thousands of whom the Trump administration left to die
     
    It was basically Yemen all over again. As they said elsewhere:

    “Only Donald Trump could see the tragedy in Puerto Rico and conclude that he is the victim,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) wrote on Twitter. “May God bless the souls of the nearly 3,000 Americans that died in Puerto Rico and may he take pity on your soul Mr. President.”
     
    OT links:

    Lyon bomb blast suspect in custody, under formal investigation


    Police initially arrested the main suspect, a 24-year-old Algerian computer student, and three other people in connection with the case on Monday.
     
    The things IT nerds can do when they want to. Or is being an "IT student" the same as "working as a waiter" nowadays? It could well be!

    And also:

    Privacy? What’s that? Facebook lawyer argues users have none

    “You have to closely guard something to have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” Snyder explained, claiming that Facebook is merely a “digital town square” where users voluntarily dispense with any notion of privacy and any “reasonable Facebook user” would have been aware that third-party app-makers could access their data through friends’ activity.

    US District Court Judge Vince Chhabria pointed out that just last month, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was rapturously declaring “the future is private!” and announcing the company’s privacy-focused new direction – a far cry from Snyder’s scornful dismissal of the concept.
     

    Toward the end of April, it became clear why, as Dorsey slouched into the Oval Office to meet his most controversial customer product.

    I’ve fixed this bit; the popularity of this stupidity is maddening. Donald Trump does not pay a dime to Twitter. Twitter makes money* from advertising (i.e., selling its users’ attention) and by directly selling data about its users, mostly via application-programming interfaces (who they are, what they read, what they endorse, who they are connected to, etc.). In other words, the very people these dumbasses call Twitter’s customers are in fact its products. Can you imagine a hooker being called a pimp’s customer?! That’s the level of stupidity (or, more likely, disingenuous evil) we are working with here, folks. Twitter’s customer’s are the likes of Coca-Cola and eMpTyVee (for advertising) and bastards like Snaptrends, Mention, Intutel, Awario, and Brandwatch (to collect obscene amount of data about you that you provided for free, then resell it at great profit).

    If you’ve never heard of the second lot, that is by design: the game only profits its organisers if indeed the products – Donald Trump, your Auntie Karen, whomever – believe they are some kind of “customer” being provided a service. This also leads to misguided expectations of privacy, rights in the platform, and so on.

    Sure, some clever folks – Donald Trump, Justin Beiber, Jojo Siwa – use these platforms to benefit themselves, but that’s not to say even then that they are customers. At best they’ve achieved a coincidental symbiosis. Doing a Stupic Human Trick on Late Night might make you rich and famous, I guess, but Letterman’s people didn’t book you to advance your career – they booked you because they decided you would entice people to watch the show, in turn enabling them to sell advertising….

    *What money it does make; like many such outfits, it’s mostly a giant bubble of speculation) from investments, rather than a going concern with revenue from products or services….

    • Replies: @Craig Nelsen

    I’ve fixed this bit; the popularity of this stupidity is maddening.
     
    Good, intelligent, insightful post. Do we ever, I wonder, reach peak maddening?
  44. @El Dato
    The Facehugger Post is again trying to un-exist badthinkers, wreckers and dangerous people and basically writing open letters to Jack The Twitter to help out? And publishes what amounts to a kill-list?

    Say it ain't so!

    Oh man, that's a long article.

    Social media platforms are private companies. They can regulate content and users how they see fit.
     
    Unless they regulate the left. Then they are companies profiting from tax cuts, NSA brown envelopes, access to movers & shakers and possibly gentrification.

    scientific racism
     
    I still don't know whether that's good or bad.

    Puerto Ricans, thousands of whom the Trump administration left to die
     
    It was basically Yemen all over again. As they said elsewhere:

    “Only Donald Trump could see the tragedy in Puerto Rico and conclude that he is the victim,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) wrote on Twitter. “May God bless the souls of the nearly 3,000 Americans that died in Puerto Rico and may he take pity on your soul Mr. President.”
     
    OT links:

    Lyon bomb blast suspect in custody, under formal investigation


    Police initially arrested the main suspect, a 24-year-old Algerian computer student, and three other people in connection with the case on Monday.
     
    The things IT nerds can do when they want to. Or is being an "IT student" the same as "working as a waiter" nowadays? It could well be!

    And also:

    Privacy? What’s that? Facebook lawyer argues users have none

    “You have to closely guard something to have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” Snyder explained, claiming that Facebook is merely a “digital town square” where users voluntarily dispense with any notion of privacy and any “reasonable Facebook user” would have been aware that third-party app-makers could access their data through friends’ activity.

    US District Court Judge Vince Chhabria pointed out that just last month, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was rapturously declaring “the future is private!” and announcing the company’s privacy-focused new direction – a far cry from Snyder’s scornful dismissal of the concept.
     

    Thanks for the summary.

    Social media platforms are private companies. They can regulate content and users how they see fit.

    Laughable notion coming from the likes of HuffPo, who gleefully announce a state right to raid and arrest when it comes time to gleefully crush private companies who don’t want to bake gay cakes, higher a particular person, etc. in a slight quest to regulate their content and users.

  45. @Steve Sailer
    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I've never published.

    Actually, the remarkable thing is that with millions of words published, the Left still has to resort to that same old (and true) Hurricane Katrina story to “prove” you are a deplorable. I guess these Lefites don’t read much. And/or they simply agreed at their Journolist meeting that this was going to be their go-to strategy when Sailer or HBD comes up.

    • Agree: Lot
  46. Though these accounts are easily discoverable on Twitter, publishing their names could bring them more attention.

    Before continuing to publish their names….

    HuffPost is only publishing their user IDs, not the @ “handles” most commonly associated with Twitter accounts.

    Head-scratchingly bizarre until I realised that including the IDs must be a legal precaution against misidentification.

  47. I have recommended Steve Sailer to several people as the best antidote to mainstream cant. One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite. I see him more as a rebutter of unfounded orthodoxy.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite.
     
    Sailer is a righteous Jew.
    , @AnonAnon

    I have recommended Steve Sailer to several people as the best antidote to mainstream cant. One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite.
     
    I don’t dare recommend Steve to any of my friends, he (and a lot of the stuff on Unz) is just too radioactive. He’s been writing crimethink for over two decades - I think I first ran across him on uber-naughty Vdare. I got booted off Free Republic nearly two decades ago for linking to an iSteve article so I find it hard to believe long time readers didn’t know Steve wasn’t persona non grata. I don’t dare follow him on Twitter, people dig through your follows and the web is full of envious nuts who are happy to ruin your life. I’m probably already on some sort of naughty list just following Trump and the other people I do - I fly infrequently and the last two times I flew I’ve been pulled aside for extra screening and I’m heading into grandmother territory. I’ll know for sure if it happens the next time,
  48. You can literally see the Sailer mouth frothing like the sea.

    “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.”

  49. @Peter Johnson
    According to the linked article, anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    Facts are hateful and racist. Therefore fact-based science is the new junk science.

  50. If “human bio-diversity” is another name for scientific racism, then is “diversity” another name for unscientific racism? Afterall, “diversity” is a primary excuse to discriminate.

  51. I got my gripes against Steve Sailer, too, Mr. Luke O’Brien!

    I hereby state that Steve Sailer went out of his way to agitate and irritate short men by doing two things a tall person should never do.

    Steve Sailer went so far as to 1) add an additional one eighth of an inch to his claimed height of six feet four inches tall, thereby making him 6 ft 4 and 1/8 inches tall and 2) Sailer took great joy in boasting about his ability to stand off a good distance from a shorter opponent in a fencing/sword competition and use his longer arms and height advantage to easily dispatch his short and shorter-armed foe.

    I have an ancestor named Jeremiah Sullivan who fought in the American Secessionary War from the British Empire. I am proud to have Irish blood and I take great delight in going after the Boston — New York — Philadelphia and 1840s Irish people and Irish newcomers who are running amok — such as Comey and Brennan and General Casey.

    I must admit that this Leprechaun bastard Luke O’Brien is really pissing me the Hell off, DAMMIT!

    The American Empire has difficult problems and dilemmas which require people of wisdom and intelligence and perspective to come up with solutions, and this filthy corporate propaganda whore twit, Luke O’Brien, is busy nitpicking and using accusations of so-called “racism” to silence those who would offer solutions to the problems confronting the American Empire.

    The corporate media is anti-White.

    The corporate propaganda whores who infest the media are anti-White.

    The anti-White corporate media outlets such as Google and Facebook and Comcast and Warner Media and Viacom and Disney and Fox News Murdoch must be broken up or obliterated or both.

    God Bless Decent Irish People And To Hell With Leprechaun Bastard Luke O’Brien!

  52. @Buzz Mohawk


    “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    Wow. An inventor! Mad props!
     
    Steve can't be an inventor. Inventors are black.

    Naw, Buzz, Steve’s an inventor. “Weaponized BadThink” isn’t something African inventors couldn’t have come up with, they’re too nice and progressive. Also, meant to hit “LOL”.

  53. Anonymous[303] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon
    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn't a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.

    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    • Replies: @Forbes
    By your implication, Steve is a Caucasian majoritarian...
    , @Mr. Anon

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?
     
    That doesn't make one a white nationalist. Based on their public statements regarding the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?
    , @ben tillman

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?
     
    Thatr's a citizenist position.
    , @BengaliCanadianDude
    Steve is not a white nationalist
  54. Steve Sailer => 209693451

    Wow, they even give out numbers. Will they tattoo your number on your forearm when they come to arrest you?

    I thought blacklists were bad? What about all those books and movies lamenting lives destroyed by McCarthyism, writers who couldn’t get a job because they were on a blacklist, how that was un-American, etc.? I guess they just meant blacklists of Leftists. It’s all who-whom – it had nothing to do with principle. Red Channels wasn’t the government either – I never heard a Leftist say that Red Channels was peachy keen because the First Amendment doesn’t prohibit private companies from putting you on a blacklist. I guess HuffPo is Red Channels now. Or maybe Brown Channels?

    Well Steve, I guess it’s time for your 15 minutes. Ready for your closeup?

    • LOL: BB753
    • Replies: @ic1000
    Steve Sailer => 209693451 24601

    He probably stole a loaf of bread, too.

  55. Goodwhite Lady: Now class, can anyone use the word demean in a sentence? Yes, Lympho’Deena…go ahead!

    Lympho’Deena: We was playin’ on Old Lady Jenkins lawn and den demean bitch done yell at us!

  56. Kind of funny that he lists Steve as a “former National Review writer,” but not Peter Brimelow who was on staff there for years. I wonder if John Derbyshire is disappointed he didn’t even make the list.

  57. Shouldn’t that be The Whitelist?

    • Agree: JudgeSmails
    • LOL: Digital Samizdat
  58. @Jack D

    Steve Sailer => 209693451
     
    Wow, they even give out numbers. Will they tattoo your number on your forearm when they come to arrest you?

    I thought blacklists were bad? What about all those books and movies lamenting lives destroyed by McCarthyism, writers who couldn't get a job because they were on a blacklist, how that was un-American, etc.? I guess they just meant blacklists of Leftists. It's all who-whom - it had nothing to do with principle. Red Channels wasn't the government either - I never heard a Leftist say that Red Channels was peachy keen because the First Amendment doesn't prohibit private companies from putting you on a blacklist. I guess HuffPo is Red Channels now. Or maybe Brown Channels?

    Well Steve, I guess it's time for your 15 minutes. Ready for your closeup?

    https://youtu.be/zIcC8YJrevQ?t=15

    Steve Sailer => 209693451 24601

    He probably stole a loaf of bread, too.

  59. The corporate media — including the internet corporations — must be broken up and obliterated.

    The corporate media and the internet corporations have too much power.

    There must be a MAGNA TRUMPY just like the Magna Carta to declare that the corporate media and the internet corporations must never again be allowed to concentrate and hold so much power over mass opinion and mass communications.

    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.

    COMCAST must be destroyed! Just like the Roman said about Carthage.

    GOOGLE must be destroyed.

    I am now starting an exercise program to prepare myself to lead my troops into Philadelphia to legally stop the anti-American scum in the COMCAST organized crime syndicate.

    The White Core American army shall assist any and all patriots — at the US Justice Department or at some bar somewhere — who want to curtail the power of the anti-free speech scoundrels in the corporate media and the internet corporations — especially the COMCAST mob.

    Mount up and ride to the sound of the guns!

    Remember, the Founding Fathers were just live action role playing as Romans and Greeks when they decided that they could get a better deal for themselves outside of the British Empire than within it.

    The US Justice Department mush CRUSH the corporate media and the internet corporations, DAMMIT!

    • Replies: @ACommenter
    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.
    and it went by unnoticed and uncelebrated in the media... if you read what it has to says about international bankers and (((international bankers))) it's not a surprise.
    , @El Dato
    Agree.
    , @dfordoom

    The corporate media — including the internet corporations — must be broken up and obliterated.
     
    Agreed. Capitalism is the enemy.
  60. I just checked and Edison is still on Google’s list of “American inventors”. He’s the last (white) man standing, although black women are gaining fast – there’s Madame Walker, the inventor of black hair straightening – certainly that outranks the telephone or telegraph. When was the last time you used a telegraph?

    And then there is Patricia Bath. In 1986, Bath invented the Laserphaco Probe, improving treatment for cataract patients. She patented the device in 1988, becoming the first African-American female doctor to receive a medical patent, only 350 short years after African Americans arrived on American soil. The Phacoprobe (pronounced fecal probe) surely ranks ahead of the steam boat. When was the last time you rode on a steam boat?

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    BTW, I checked up on how the Fecal Probe was doing in the cataract surgery market. As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold. It turns out that shining laser beams inside your eyeballs might not be such a hot idea.

    If you get cataract surgery today, it's not done with lasers, it's done with an ultrasound probe which shatters the cloudy lens so it can be suctioned out without damaging the rest of your eyeball. Over 100 million people have had their cataracts removed using this technology. It was invented by Charles Kelman, a Jew from Brooklyn but who cares about white men.

    , @International Jew

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?
     
    Could be soon. Here's my prediction: Edison's demotion from the pantheon will come with a movie about a black laboratory assistant or two that gives them credit for his inventions. It'll be called "Hidden Lightbulbs".
    , @Reg Cæsar

    I just checked and Edison is still on Google’s list of “American inventors”.
     
    What does their list of "American social media innovators" look like? Anyone darker more colorful than Jerry Yang?
    , @Alden
    Edison stole the electric light, light bulbs and movie camera from his black gardener.
  61. President Donald Trump is the abuser-in-chief on Twitter.

    Steve did single-handedly elect President Donald Trump.

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/04/steve-sailer-invented-identity-politics-for-the-alt-right.html

  62. @Bardon Kaldian
    I don't know why Steve put that Titania, but I had a good laugh reading 3-4 messages on her account (I guess this is the name, I'm clueless about social media)


    Titania McGrath
    ‏ @TitaniaMcGrath
    20h20 hours ago

    Titania McGrath Retweeted Alyssa Milano

    The ultimate goal of feminism must be to eliminate the necessity for sexual intercourse.

    I also read the twitter accounts. I have never laughed so hard. I presume that that”she” is a hoax to black wash the leftist and feminists. The real “Titania” is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.

    • Replies: @Whitey Whiteman III
    A comedian called Andrew Doyle has claimed it.
    , @MEH 0910

    The real “Titania” is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.
     
    British comedian.

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

    Titania McGrath (@TitaniaMcGrath) is a parody Twitter user and author created by comedian and Spiked columnist Andrew Doyle.
     
    https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com?lang=en

    https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1117435875527413760/agDBSdvC_400x400.png

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/12/why-i-invented-titania-mcgrath/

    https://twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath/status/1133345387719405573
    , @JimDandyxxxItsii
    It's Andrew Doyle. Spiked columnist.
    , @Forbes
    Titania is a guy (Spiked columnist Andrew Doyle) in the UK with a book out in September.

    https://www.amazon.com/Woke-Social-Justice-Titania-McGrath/dp/1472130847/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
  63. The twee responses here are only indicative of how ignorant many of you are in regards to how bad its gotten.

    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    I've been keeping quiet 'cause I'm afraid I'll get called an Eeyore.
  64. @Jack D
    I just checked and Edison is still on Google's list of "American inventors". He's the last (white) man standing, although black women are gaining fast - there's Madame Walker, the inventor of black hair straightening - certainly that outranks the telephone or telegraph. When was the last time you used a telegraph?

    And then there is Patricia Bath. In 1986, Bath invented the Laserphaco Probe, improving treatment for cataract patients. She patented the device in 1988, becoming the first African-American female doctor to receive a medical patent, only 350 short years after African Americans arrived on American soil. The Phacoprobe (pronounced fecal probe) surely ranks ahead of the steam boat. When was the last time you rode on a steam boat?

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?

    BTW, I checked up on how the Fecal Probe was doing in the cataract surgery market. As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold. It turns out that shining laser beams inside your eyeballs might not be such a hot idea.

    If you get cataract surgery today, it’s not done with lasers, it’s done with an ultrasound probe which shatters the cloudy lens so it can be suctioned out without damaging the rest of your eyeball. Over 100 million people have had their cataracts removed using this technology. It was invented by Charles Kelman, a Jew from Brooklyn but who cares about white men.

    • Replies: @International Jew

    As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold.
     
    Not lookin' good for her. So I'm gonna short Dr. Bath and put my money on the current #25, Janet Emerson Bashen. Her patent has actually been approved, making her the first black woman with a software patent to her name. But you'll need to read the Wikipedia article to fully appreciate Bashen's awesomeness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Emerson_Bashen

    I've said it before but lists of great black scientists and inventors remind me of a (thin) little book I have about great Jewish baseball players, in which long before you get to #10, they're on guys whose career never broke out of the minors!

  65. @Jack D
    I just checked and Edison is still on Google's list of "American inventors". He's the last (white) man standing, although black women are gaining fast - there's Madame Walker, the inventor of black hair straightening - certainly that outranks the telephone or telegraph. When was the last time you used a telegraph?

    And then there is Patricia Bath. In 1986, Bath invented the Laserphaco Probe, improving treatment for cataract patients. She patented the device in 1988, becoming the first African-American female doctor to receive a medical patent, only 350 short years after African Americans arrived on American soil. The Phacoprobe (pronounced fecal probe) surely ranks ahead of the steam boat. When was the last time you rode on a steam boat?

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?

    Could be soon. Here’s my prediction: Edison’s demotion from the pantheon will come with a movie about a black laboratory assistant or two that gives them credit for his inventions. It’ll be called “Hidden Lightbulbs”.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    He’s already faded into obscurity.
    , @El Dato
    Tesla was not black!

    But apparently got thoroughly patriarch'd and made unemployable by Edison.

    https://i.imgur.com/o7nSWK5.png

    https://i.imgur.com/P9xz92w.png
    , @JackOH
    IJ, envy used to be a deadly sin, if my memory's okay, but we've got swarms of political hustlers who believe the best way of lighting a candle is to snuff out the other guy's. I want to laugh harder at some of the more preposterous claims made by some Black activists, but I'm guessing a beat-down of the memory of White dudes' achievements will soften a feckless White polity for--wait for it--"reparations".
    , @Redneck farmer
    Dude, didn't you see the black history month PSA about how the guy who perfected the lightbulb filament was black? They ran in the 80s and 90s.
  66. How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn’t support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government’s observance of the first amendment.

    • Agree: ben tillman, ACommenter
    • Replies: @anon
    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing?

    The Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment requires certain private venues to allow Freedom of Speech.
    , @Anonymous
    That bears restating more often. Youd think it self evident, and yet there seems to be no sense of inhibition about trying to silence dissidents these days, or even just about being obviously self interested in trying to victimize your political, social and racial enemies in the public sphere.
    Very slippery slope as communism and the reaction to its adherents taught us in mid twentieth centruy Europe.

    I dont think Dorsey in particular is on board with being the arbiter of what people can blurb about on the internet. From the interviews Ive seen he doesnt care much what the broader media and press think about how he runs his business affairs.
    , @Desiderius
    Our society is not tolerant of free speech.
    , @Corvinus
    "How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn’t support free speech, then that society will not have free speech."

    Point taken. However, there will always be debate what constitutes "free speech". As always, context is needed.

    The Supreme Court previously held in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), that the Constitution's Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, that states were free to create laws that restricted freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights (by way of the Tenth Amendment), and that the federal courts could not interfere with the enforcement of such laws. Thus, state governments would be allowed to censor newspapers, magazines, books, plays, movies, and comedy shows. In other words, there was a strict line between federal citizenship and state citizenship (which has changed today).

    In 1925, the decision in Gitlow v. New York ruled that the federal protection of free speech applied also to state governments. The decision was the first in which the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause required state and federal governments to be held to the same standards in regulating speech. The case arose in November 1919 when Benjamin Gitlow, who had served as a local assemblyman, and an associate, Alan Larkin, were arrested by New York City police officers for criminal anarchy, an offense under New York state law. Gitlow and Larkin were both Communist Party members and publishers of The Revolutionary Age, a radical newspaper in which they printed “The Left Wing Manifesto” (modeled on “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels), which advocated the violent overthrow of the federal government.

    Although Gitlow argued at trial that no violent action was precipitated by the article, he was convicted, and the conviction was subsequently upheld by the state appellate court. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court took place in April and November 1923, and the Supreme Court issued its ruling, written by Justice Edward T. Sanford, in June 1925. The court upheld Gitlow’s conviction, but perhaps ironically the ruling expanded free speech protections for individuals, since the court held that the First Amendment was applicable to state governments through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Furthermore, in the history of free speech in our nation, there always have been consequences. Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship. And while their terms of conditions may be arbitrarily applied, with certain undesirable views suddenly purged at a drop of a hat, a person ultimately has the choice to adhere to those terms or seek alternatives. I thought that victimhood only applied to people of color and feminists!

    The Alt Right should be creating their own media and their platforms.

    , @Jack D
    In all the years that the Left blabbed about the Hollywood Blacklist, I never heard them once say that the studios were not the government and so the Blacklist was fine.

    The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by social media companies ― a distinction seemingly lost on Trump.
     
    I never heard them say "The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by movie studios ― a distinction seemingly lost on us."

    Not once did they say this. Instead they complained endlessly about the blacklist and made movies about its martyrs.
    , @anon
    The most famous opinion from Jacobellis, however, was Justice Potter Stewart's concurrence, holding that the Constitution protected all obscenity except "white nationalism". He wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."[9]
  67. and British fake news merchant Paul Joseph Watson,

    If being a merchant of fake news is a show stopper, then half of the MSM, if not more, should be dumped from social media.

  68. @istevefan
    https://twitter.com/lukeobrien/status/1134126101960318976

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn't support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government's observance of the first amendment.

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing?

    The Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment requires certain private venues to allow Freedom of Speech.

  69. @Jack Hanson
    The twee responses here are only indicative of how ignorant many of you are in regards to how bad its gotten.

    I’ve been keeping quiet ’cause I’m afraid I’ll get called an Eeyore.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    New observations means new data means new hypothesis. This ain't rocket science. I've accepted that currently we have no way to win, therefore shifting resources to the next best strategy: don't lose in the meantime.

    Steve is gonna wake up one morning to find out his bank closed his checking account due to his being literally Hitler as according to a soyface trust fund baby. He will have zero recourse to appeal being locked out of the banking systems.

  70. @The Alarmist

    Steve Sailer is a former National Review writer who popularized the term “human bio-diversity” ― another name for scientific racism ― and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    I am indeed humbled to have my comments accepted to appear alongside the works of one of our truly great modern thinkers.

    Indeed, Steve isn’t a White Nationalist, but he can see us from there.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Indeed, Steve isn’t a White Nationalist
     
    Steve doesn't favor the United States having a White majority?
  71. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan
    https://twitter.com/lukeobrien/status/1134126101960318976

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn't support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government's observance of the first amendment.

    That bears restating more often. Youd think it self evident, and yet there seems to be no sense of inhibition about trying to silence dissidents these days, or even just about being obviously self interested in trying to victimize your political, social and racial enemies in the public sphere.
    Very slippery slope as communism and the reaction to its adherents taught us in mid twentieth centruy Europe.

    I dont think Dorsey in particular is on board with being the arbiter of what people can blurb about on the internet. From the interviews Ive seen he doesnt care much what the broader media and press think about how he runs his business affairs.

  72. @Peter Johnson
    According to the linked article, anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    Lol.

    13th century sage: So if you burn down my city and everyone in it, how is that supposed to work?

    Genghis: Zing!

  73. @istevefan
    https://twitter.com/lukeobrien/status/1134126101960318976

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn't support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government's observance of the first amendment.

    Our society is not tolerant of free speech.

  74. @International Jew

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?
     
    Could be soon. Here's my prediction: Edison's demotion from the pantheon will come with a movie about a black laboratory assistant or two that gives them credit for his inventions. It'll be called "Hidden Lightbulbs".

    He’s already faded into obscurity.

    • Replies: @BB753
    But by Tesla, another white man.
  75. @flyingtiger
    I also read the twitter accounts. I have never laughed so hard. I presume that that"she" is a hoax to black wash the leftist and feminists. The real "Titania" is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.

    A comedian called Andrew Doyle has claimed it.

  76. @flyingtiger
    I also read the twitter accounts. I have never laughed so hard. I presume that that"she" is a hoax to black wash the leftist and feminists. The real "Titania" is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.

    The real “Titania” is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.

    British comedian.

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

    Titania McGrath (@TitaniaMcGrath) is a parody Twitter user and author created by comedian and Spiked columnist Andrew Doyle.

    https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com?lang=en

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/12/why-i-invented-titania-mcgrath/

  77. @Charles Pewitt
    The corporate media -- including the internet corporations -- must be broken up and obliterated.

    The corporate media and the internet corporations have too much power.

    There must be a MAGNA TRUMPY just like the Magna Carta to declare that the corporate media and the internet corporations must never again be allowed to concentrate and hold so much power over mass opinion and mass communications.

    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.

    COMCAST must be destroyed! Just like the Roman said about Carthage.

    GOOGLE must be destroyed.

    I am now starting an exercise program to prepare myself to lead my troops into Philadelphia to legally stop the anti-American scum in the COMCAST organized crime syndicate.

    The White Core American army shall assist any and all patriots -- at the US Justice Department or at some bar somewhere -- who want to curtail the power of the anti-free speech scoundrels in the corporate media and the internet corporations -- especially the COMCAST mob.

    Mount up and ride to the sound of the guns!

    Remember, the Founding Fathers were just live action role playing as Romans and Greeks when they decided that they could get a better deal for themselves outside of the British Empire than within it.

    The US Justice Department mush CRUSH the corporate media and the internet corporations, DAMMIT!

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1134658585391239168

    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.
    and it went by unnoticed and uncelebrated in the media… if you read what it has to says about international bankers and (((international bankers))) it’s not a surprise.

    • Replies: @Alden
    There are a couple paragraphs about how the evil King John has allowed Jews to collect their high interest loans instead of running the Jews out of town as the nobles often did.
  78. @istevefan
    https://twitter.com/lukeobrien/status/1134126101960318976

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn't support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government's observance of the first amendment.

    “How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn’t support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.”

    Point taken. However, there will always be debate what constitutes “free speech”. As always, context is needed.

    The Supreme Court previously held in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), that the Constitution’s Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, that states were free to create laws that restricted freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights (by way of the Tenth Amendment), and that the federal courts could not interfere with the enforcement of such laws. Thus, state governments would be allowed to censor newspapers, magazines, books, plays, movies, and comedy shows. In other words, there was a strict line between federal citizenship and state citizenship (which has changed today).

    In 1925, the decision in Gitlow v. New York ruled that the federal protection of free speech applied also to state governments. The decision was the first in which the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause required state and federal governments to be held to the same standards in regulating speech. The case arose in November 1919 when Benjamin Gitlow, who had served as a local assemblyman, and an associate, Alan Larkin, were arrested by New York City police officers for criminal anarchy, an offense under New York state law. Gitlow and Larkin were both Communist Party members and publishers of The Revolutionary Age, a radical newspaper in which they printed “The Left Wing Manifesto” (modeled on “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels), which advocated the violent overthrow of the federal government.

    Although Gitlow argued at trial that no violent action was precipitated by the article, he was convicted, and the conviction was subsequently upheld by the state appellate court. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court took place in April and November 1923, and the Supreme Court issued its ruling, written by Justice Edward T. Sanford, in June 1925. The court upheld Gitlow’s conviction, but perhaps ironically the ruling expanded free speech protections for individuals, since the court held that the First Amendment was applicable to state governments through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Furthermore, in the history of free speech in our nation, there always have been consequences. Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship. And while their terms of conditions may be arbitrarily applied, with certain undesirable views suddenly purged at a drop of a hat, a person ultimately has the choice to adhere to those terms or seek alternatives. I thought that victimhood only applied to people of color and feminists!

    The Alt Right should be creating their own media and their platforms.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship.
     
    Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer "platforms", but "publishers", and responsible for what they do let through.

    If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn't an accessory.
    , @TWS
    You are aware the 14th cuts that away? You are aware that if you monitor and edit speech you are no longer a carrier but a publisher thus your protection is null and void. It's almost as if you're trying to get it wrong as long as it supports your view you're a special smart boy.
  79. @Charles Pewitt
    The corporate media -- including the internet corporations -- must be broken up and obliterated.

    The corporate media and the internet corporations have too much power.

    There must be a MAGNA TRUMPY just like the Magna Carta to declare that the corporate media and the internet corporations must never again be allowed to concentrate and hold so much power over mass opinion and mass communications.

    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.

    COMCAST must be destroyed! Just like the Roman said about Carthage.

    GOOGLE must be destroyed.

    I am now starting an exercise program to prepare myself to lead my troops into Philadelphia to legally stop the anti-American scum in the COMCAST organized crime syndicate.

    The White Core American army shall assist any and all patriots -- at the US Justice Department or at some bar somewhere -- who want to curtail the power of the anti-free speech scoundrels in the corporate media and the internet corporations -- especially the COMCAST mob.

    Mount up and ride to the sound of the guns!

    Remember, the Founding Fathers were just live action role playing as Romans and Greeks when they decided that they could get a better deal for themselves outside of the British Empire than within it.

    The US Justice Department mush CRUSH the corporate media and the internet corporations, DAMMIT!

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1134658585391239168

    Agree.

  80. Steve, see you at Manznar. They will reopen that for White men. I guess I’ll be in the bunk next before the showers.

    All White men. Even Jack Dorsey.

    There is no point in civ nat stuff. Huff Oist is basically targeting you for anti fa assassination as the unpaid secret corporation police.

    The extermination plans are ramping up. Clear as day. We either fight back and leave a lot of pain for the effort to put us in Manzanar. Or go quietly as Ghandi advised the Jews in the holocaust.

  81. @istevefan
    https://twitter.com/lukeobrien/status/1134126101960318976

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn't support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government's observance of the first amendment.

    In all the years that the Left blabbed about the Hollywood Blacklist, I never heard them once say that the studios were not the government and so the Blacklist was fine.

    The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by social media companies ― a distinction seemingly lost on Trump.

    I never heard them say “The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by movie studios ― a distinction seemingly lost on us.”

    Not once did they say this. Instead they complained endlessly about the blacklist and made movies about its martyrs.

    • Agree: dfordoom, Prodigal son
    • Replies: @International Jew
    In my ideal world, the courts would view the First same as they view the Fourteenth. Thus, disrupting Milo Ianopoulos at Berkeley would be prosecuted the same as intimidating blacks who approach voting booths on election day.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Hell of a good point, Jack!
    , @istevefan
    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don't know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?
  82. @flyingtiger
    I also read the twitter accounts. I have never laughed so hard. I presume that that"she" is a hoax to black wash the leftist and feminists. The real "Titania" is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.

    It’s Andrew Doyle. Spiked columnist.

  83. Only old people coming to the end of their careers can speak anything that challanges the left: Barr, Dershowitz, Streep. If you are younger and still building a career there are Progressive followers in every employer and institution and they will destroy you. It does not matter if you are right and telling the truth, the only test is if you support/forward the left.

  84. Whoa. You know how powerful you are when they put you on the blacklist!

  85. @International Jew

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?
     
    Could be soon. Here's my prediction: Edison's demotion from the pantheon will come with a movie about a black laboratory assistant or two that gives them credit for his inventions. It'll be called "Hidden Lightbulbs".

    Tesla was not black!

    But apparently got thoroughly patriarch’d and made unemployable by Edison.

    • Replies: @bored identity
    bored identity strongly believes that every.single.time Marvel waits to happen to any foreign born person with a special gift:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dtp4tk_XgAAnzSq.jpg


    (Although - as y'all can see - sometimes even almighty Kal -El has to bite his upper lip while listening to some of Super Colon Powells That Be camel turds )
  86. @Kronos
    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.

    Indeed, one could employ that old go-to from the liberal play-book – asking how it is that the other person knows some particular hate-fact, as if the mere knowledge itself were some kind of crime. If some liberal happens to know about Steve Sailer or HBD, you could always ask him “How come you know about such things? Do you read unz.com? Why would you do that?”

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, Mr. Anon, that's close to the idea written about on Peak Stupidity in "6 Degrees from Kevin Bacon". See, the TV financial guy Larry Kudlow was given a hard time by the Lyin' Press for VDare's chief Peter Brimelow's having attended Kudlow's birthday party. He always went, but the LP got wind of it this time.

    I figure anyone in Mr. Brimelow's position has taken on a lot of power due to this phenomena. This means he can attend, or threaten to attend, or just slip into a selfie, with any vile opponent he would like to destroy. Evidence of his being in attendance, or pictures, can be used to put the opponent in a very bad light among his peers. "I was there, and he didn't kick me out of his party!" "Here's a picture of your 'journalist' with me, the head of VDare.com. Just what the hell do you intend to do about this?!"

    Steve Sailer has this power now, whether he knows it or not. Of course, with great power comes great responsibility, blah, blah, sure ...
    , @gregor
    There’s some quote I don’t quite remember but it’s something about how leftists turn every question of fact into a question of motivation or intention.
  87. @International Jew

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?
     
    Could be soon. Here's my prediction: Edison's demotion from the pantheon will come with a movie about a black laboratory assistant or two that gives them credit for his inventions. It'll be called "Hidden Lightbulbs".

    IJ, envy used to be a deadly sin, if my memory’s okay, but we’ve got swarms of political hustlers who believe the best way of lighting a candle is to snuff out the other guy’s. I want to laugh harder at some of the more preposterous claims made by some Black activists, but I’m guessing a beat-down of the memory of White dudes’ achievements will soften a feckless White polity for–wait for it–“reparations”.

  88. Lowe says:
    @Moses
    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a European face...forever.

    Orwell’s vision of a possible dystopian future, a boot stamping on a face, presumably European, will not come to pass. The only people interested and capable of implementing this totalitarian “world of trampling and being trampled upon” are Europeans, who are vanishing demographically.

    Everyone else is either uninterested (East Asians) or inadequate to the task (Middle Easterners, Africans). What the future actually looks like is fairly libertarian, filled with dark-hued human bodies, an over-abundance of low quality labor, and such a scarcity of competence and idealogical passion that a 1984-style Inner Party is out of the question.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    I done forget about things like Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and sundry others.

    While the world won't be suffering under the boot of an African Tribal Leader, which runs affairs only locally, the East Asians cannot be discounted to have a go at World Khanate eventually.
    , @Moses
    You miss the point.

    Europeans have become everyone's favorite kicking bag. It will get worse before it gets better.

    We're all Jews now.
  89. • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Meryl Streep is getting it ...
     
    ... good and hard.
  90. @Jack D
    BTW, I checked up on how the Fecal Probe was doing in the cataract surgery market. As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold. It turns out that shining laser beams inside your eyeballs might not be such a hot idea.

    If you get cataract surgery today, it's not done with lasers, it's done with an ultrasound probe which shatters the cloudy lens so it can be suctioned out without damaging the rest of your eyeball. Over 100 million people have had their cataracts removed using this technology. It was invented by Charles Kelman, a Jew from Brooklyn but who cares about white men.

    As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold.

    Not lookin’ good for her. So I’m gonna short Dr. Bath and put my money on the current #25, Janet Emerson Bashen. Her patent has actually been approved, making her the first black woman with a software patent to her name. But you’ll need to read the Wikipedia article to fully appreciate Bashen’s awesomeness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Emerson_Bashen

    I’ve said it before but lists of great black scientists and inventors remind me of a (thin) little book I have about great Jewish baseball players, in which long before you get to #10, they’re on guys whose career never broke out of the minors!

    • Replies: @El Dato

    Her and her cousin, Donny Moore, began tracking all of Bashen Corps. and posting them on the internet for the public to check. This service became LinkLine, "Bashen’s patented EEO compliance and case management software." On December 20, 2007 LinkLine earned Patent No. 6,985,922,B1, making Janet Emerson Bashen the first African-American woman to earn a software patent.
     
    I don't understand what happened here and why one would get a patent on this?

    (apart from the fact that "software patents" should never have been allowed because they "patent" not an actual physical device but an idea; how greedy and self-destructive is that)
    , @Clyde
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Jewish_Major_League_Baseball_players
    165 Jewish Major league baseball players.
    , @Steve Sailer
    The 21st Century has had a fair number of good baseball players who are at least half Jewish. I think Alex Bregman of Houston is full Jewish. He's leading the American League in homers.
  91. “We have policies around violent and extremist groups,”

    Implying most ethnopatriots belong to ethnopatriotic groups.

    Which they don’t. I’ve been a white advocate for over 15 years and I’ve never belonged to any organization more political than Triple A.

    So conduct being using the service to periodically or episodically to harass someone, using hateful imagery that might be associated with the KKK or the American Nazi Party. Those are all things that we act on immediately.” …

    So, they’re banning the ADL, SPLC, antifa, (((Big Media))), academia, the left in general…

  92. @Desiderius
    He’s already faded into obscurity.

    But by Tesla, another white man.

  93. Almost 18 months after Twitter promised to crack down on hate, the platform teems with racist extremists.

    By Luke O’Brien

    Wow! His name is even “O’Brien”. And yet I don’t think he’s a member of the Inner Party.

    To reinforce his point, Trump retweeted Canadian white nationalist Lauren Southern and British fake news merchant Paul Joseph Watson, one of the extremists banned by Facebook.

    I’ve seen a number podcasts by Paul Joseph Watson. I don’t recall him saying anything fake or extreme. I guess the new definition of “extremist” is anyone who disagrees with Luke O’Brien

  94. @International Jew

    As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold.
     
    Not lookin' good for her. So I'm gonna short Dr. Bath and put my money on the current #25, Janet Emerson Bashen. Her patent has actually been approved, making her the first black woman with a software patent to her name. But you'll need to read the Wikipedia article to fully appreciate Bashen's awesomeness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Emerson_Bashen

    I've said it before but lists of great black scientists and inventors remind me of a (thin) little book I have about great Jewish baseball players, in which long before you get to #10, they're on guys whose career never broke out of the minors!

    Her and her cousin, Donny Moore, began tracking all of Bashen Corps. and posting them on the internet for the public to check. This service became LinkLine, “Bashen’s patented EEO compliance and case management software.” On December 20, 2007 LinkLine earned Patent No. 6,985,922,B1, making Janet Emerson Bashen the first African-American woman to earn a software patent.

    I don’t understand what happened here and why one would get a patent on this?

    (apart from the fact that “software patents” should never have been allowed because they “patent” not an actual physical device but an idea; how greedy and self-destructive is that)

    • Replies: @International Jew
    "Her and her cousin Donny", Lol.

    If you look at the page's history (visible only in the page's desktop version) she's the principle author. The Talk page records her efforts (and note her subliterate writing) to keep the Wikipedia editors from deleting her page.

    And delete it they would if they applied their normal standards. Those standards require copious documentation (meaning footnotes to material that's (ideally) published on paper but readily accessible online. They reject anything that looks like advertisement or self-promotion. And they require that the subject be "notable".

    Her page fails all three standards. Though I guess, as #25 on Google's list of "American inventors", she is "notable", albeit in an absurd way.
  95. and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”

    On Wikipedia, this claim would be annotated “[by who?” ] and “[citation needed] “.

  96. This is seriously weird, please ignore if someone else has posted this Steve.

    Progressives in Vermont are trying to remove an anti-slavery clause from the states constitution.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/06/slavery-vermonts-constitution/588853/

  97. @Jack D
    I just checked and Edison is still on Google's list of "American inventors". He's the last (white) man standing, although black women are gaining fast - there's Madame Walker, the inventor of black hair straightening - certainly that outranks the telephone or telegraph. When was the last time you used a telegraph?

    And then there is Patricia Bath. In 1986, Bath invented the Laserphaco Probe, improving treatment for cataract patients. She patented the device in 1988, becoming the first African-American female doctor to receive a medical patent, only 350 short years after African Americans arrived on American soil. The Phacoprobe (pronounced fecal probe) surely ranks ahead of the steam boat. When was the last time you rode on a steam boat?

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?

    I just checked and Edison is still on Google’s list of “American inventors”.

    What does their list of “American social media innovators” look like? Anyone darker more colorful than Jerry Yang?

  98. @flyingtiger
    I also read the twitter accounts. I have never laughed so hard. I presume that that"she" is a hoax to black wash the leftist and feminists. The real "Titania" is some guy in a basement wearing a MAGA hat.

    Titania is a guy (Spiked columnist Andrew Doyle) in the UK with a book out in September.

  99. @International Jew

    As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold.
     
    Not lookin' good for her. So I'm gonna short Dr. Bath and put my money on the current #25, Janet Emerson Bashen. Her patent has actually been approved, making her the first black woman with a software patent to her name. But you'll need to read the Wikipedia article to fully appreciate Bashen's awesomeness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Emerson_Bashen

    I've said it before but lists of great black scientists and inventors remind me of a (thin) little book I have about great Jewish baseball players, in which long before you get to #10, they're on guys whose career never broke out of the minors!

    • Replies: @International Jew
    Wow! I had no idea. So why did that book I mentioned drop down to the minors so soon? I don't have it anymore (part of a post-empty-nest cleanup) but I'll try to track it down.

    I'm kvelling all the way to the ballpark now...
  100. @Mr McKenna
    It's not just HuffPost that knows what's up. Check out CNN.

    https://i.ibb.co/G3gT2q8/CNN-2019-06-01-03-02-04.png

    TD is right. You people just can't be trusted.

    Obviously the headline was edited due to space limitations. They meant to write:

    How the shady GOP’s shady plan to help elect shady white Republicans works: It’s shady.

  101. @Kronos
    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.

    Patton Oswalt referenced isteve, betraying the fact that he was a regular reader of this blog. Since I believe Oswalt to be cynical and conniving, and his primary audiences are earnest and valiant SJW’s, I was rather surprised he would make such a foolish misstep into his own shitty mire.

    SJW’s are a shirt-sighted and cowardly lot, and the cowardly are often driven by superstition and fancy. Now, their Wizard had travelled to the dark forest, to return with his eyes a-glow, speaking in a dark forest dialect. His followers were not having it, and it blew delirious shit in his surprised, bloated twitter countenance for days.

    He never did it again! 😆

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    His dad is a retired Marine pilot who did three tours in Vietnam and named him after George Patton. I believe his dad is flight crash investigator for either the FAA or NTSB. With that background alone he might have some conservative viewpoints on various issues, he does make fun of hippies and vegetarians/vegans in his standup routines.
    , @MEH 0910

    He never did it again!
     
    https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1086691179855400960?lang=en
    https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1086819003652136960?lang=en
  102. @Jack D
    In all the years that the Left blabbed about the Hollywood Blacklist, I never heard them once say that the studios were not the government and so the Blacklist was fine.

    The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by social media companies ― a distinction seemingly lost on Trump.
     
    I never heard them say "The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by movie studios ― a distinction seemingly lost on us."

    Not once did they say this. Instead they complained endlessly about the blacklist and made movies about its martyrs.

    In my ideal world, the courts would view the First same as they view the Fourteenth. Thus, disrupting Milo Ianopoulos at Berkeley would be prosecuted the same as intimidating blacks who approach voting booths on election day.

    • Agree: istevefan
    • Replies: @istevefan

    In my ideal world,...
     
    In my ideal world whenever some one or group has a public speech, you would put forth a counter argument that you might express either at a separate location, or at the same location as the other speaker when they have finished their speech.

    We were always taught that it was best to let unpleasant people speak because they would betray themselves with their own words. Then they couldn't engender any sympathy by claiming they were denied the right to speak. In fact it was looked upon as a good thing because then a rational, intelligent person could shred the unpleasant person's position publicly.

    That's a far cry from what is happening in the 21st century. Now the goal is to do whatever it takes to prevent your opponent from speaking. As you wrote, this action should be looked upon similarly to someone preventing another from voting, or exercising his right to religious freedom.
  103. @Anonymous

    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.
     
    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    By your implication, Steve is a Caucasian majoritarian…

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    By your implication, Steve is a Caucasian majoritarian…
     
    So he's a Caucasian nationalist?
  104. Anonymous[884] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tono Bungay
    I have recommended Steve Sailer to several people as the best antidote to mainstream cant. One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite. I see him more as a rebutter of unfounded orthodoxy.

    One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite.

    Sailer is a righteous Jew.

  105. Anonymous[884] • Disclaimer says:
    @Forbes
    By your implication, Steve is a Caucasian majoritarian...

    By your implication, Steve is a Caucasian majoritarian…

    So he’s a Caucasian nationalist?

  106. @El Dato

    Her and her cousin, Donny Moore, began tracking all of Bashen Corps. and posting them on the internet for the public to check. This service became LinkLine, "Bashen’s patented EEO compliance and case management software." On December 20, 2007 LinkLine earned Patent No. 6,985,922,B1, making Janet Emerson Bashen the first African-American woman to earn a software patent.
     
    I don't understand what happened here and why one would get a patent on this?

    (apart from the fact that "software patents" should never have been allowed because they "patent" not an actual physical device but an idea; how greedy and self-destructive is that)

    “Her and her cousin Donny”, Lol.

    If you look at the page’s history (visible only in the page’s desktop version) she’s the principle author. The Talk page records her efforts (and note her subliterate writing) to keep the Wikipedia editors from deleting her page.

    And delete it they would if they applied their normal standards. Those standards require copious documentation (meaning footnotes to material that’s (ideally) published on paper but readily accessible online. They reject anything that looks like advertisement or self-promotion. And they require that the subject be “notable”.

    Her page fails all three standards. Though I guess, as #25 on Google’s list of “American inventors”, she is “notable”, albeit in an absurd way.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    I think you mean principal author.

    Sorry, just amusing in context.
  107. Anonymous[884] • Disclaimer says:
    @Neuday
    Indeed, Steve isn't a White Nationalist, but he can see us from there.

    Indeed, Steve isn’t a White Nationalist

    Steve doesn’t favor the United States having a White majority?

  108. @Ron Mexico
    Steve, When can we expect your Manifesto?

    Just before he goes on a mass shooting spree?

  109. If you can’t tell the difference between David Duke and Steve Sailer, you’re either a liar or John Podhoretz.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    If you can’t tell the difference between David Duke and Steve Sailer
     
    Define David Duke.
    , @El Dato
  110. @Clyde
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Jewish_Major_League_Baseball_players
    165 Jewish Major league baseball players.

    Wow! I had no idea. So why did that book I mentioned drop down to the minors so soon? I don’t have it anymore (part of a post-empty-nest cleanup) but I’ll try to track it down.

    I’m kvelling all the way to the ballpark now…

    • Replies: @Clyde
    Some are halfsies. My guess is 10-20 percent. Used to be lots of Jewish boxers like Slapsie Maxie --- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxie_Rosenbloom
  111. @Anonymous

    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.
     
    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    That doesn’t make one a white nationalist. Based on their public statements regarding the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    That doesn’t make one a white nationalist.
     
    That is precisely what a white nationalist is.

    Based on their public statements regarding the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?
     
    If that was their sincere intention, then yes.
    , @Henry's Cat

    in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?
     
    Then, no; now, yes.
  112. Anonymous[884] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyD
    If you can't tell the difference between David Duke and Steve Sailer, you're either a liar or John Podhoretz.

    If you can’t tell the difference between David Duke and Steve Sailer

    Define David Duke.

  113. @Lowe
    Orwell's vision of a possible dystopian future, a boot stamping on a face, presumably European, will not come to pass. The only people interested and capable of implementing this totalitarian "world of trampling and being trampled upon" are Europeans, who are vanishing demographically.

    Everyone else is either uninterested (East Asians) or inadequate to the task (Middle Easterners, Africans). What the future actually looks like is fairly libertarian, filled with dark-hued human bodies, an over-abundance of low quality labor, and such a scarcity of competence and idealogical passion that a 1984-style Inner Party is out of the question.

    I done forget about things like Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and sundry others.

    While the world won’t be suffering under the boot of an African Tribal Leader, which runs affairs only locally, the East Asians cannot be discounted to have a go at World Khanate eventually.

    • Replies: @Lowe
    Dictators who drove their (small) countries into the ground, during their brief reigns. Not the same thing as single party rule of large nation states, for decades, maybe hundreds of years.

    The only real institutions that come close were the Soviet Union, which collapsed, and Mao's China, which Deng reformed. The latter is the perfect example of why East Asians will not implement 1984 style totalitarianism, or any kind of Khanate.

    You can only do something like that if you are motivated by an emotion like intese passion or hatred. Not an animal emotion, like envy or greed. Something more complex, that motivates action to the point of self abnegation or even self destruction. East Asians aren't like that. They're smart, practical, and self-serving. They change course when they have to, and broadly they don't believe in pursuing things for their own sake.

    In 1984 O'Brien acknowledges that the Inner Party seeks power for it's own sake, out of a love for it over anything else. That's not a recipe for happiness. White people are the only people on Earth who can even imagine this way of thinking. Everyone else wants power or money or whatever because of what it can DO for them, not just because they love it in an abstract sense, or because they hate others in an abstract sense.

    Only whites are like that, and they're disappearing now.

  114. @JohnnyD
    If you can't tell the difference between David Duke and Steve Sailer, you're either a liar or John Podhoretz.
  115. @David
    "Steve that kills me six or seven dozen tropes at breakfast, washes his hands, and says to his wife, 'Fye on this quiet life, I want work!'"

    Boom, chilled.

  116. Anonymous[884] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?
     
    That doesn't make one a white nationalist. Based on their public statements regarding the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?

    That doesn’t make one a white nationalist.

    That is precisely what a white nationalist is.

    Based on their public statements regarding the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?

    If that was their sincere intention, then yes.

  117. @Achmed E. Newman
    Steve, I couldn't tell for sure from the way you pasted in the excerpts: Is "Steve Sailer" (just like that) your twitter ID? They mention not publishing these truth-tellers bad person's handles to avoid giving them publicity. Is your handle the same, but without spaces, or something? In other words, is that excerpt directly from the Huff-Po blacklist?

    (I gotta say, I hate this Huff-Post Orwellian stuff, but I one thing I like is the word "handle" from back in the days of CB radio. "What's your handle, Good Buddy? This is the Rubber Duck, you got a copy on me? C'mon back with that")

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd5ZLJWQmss

    Congratulations are due, anyway!

    This here’s the Tiny Ducky, got your ears on, Lenny?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    LOL

    How could I forget the TD?! "Can you back it off a bit, Tiny Ducky, the stupidity is getting mighty IN-tense back here?"
  118. Funny stuff. I find you to be quite an entertaining writer. Never found any extremist views in your writings. Strange stuff. if you need any non-white supporting you, show them this comment LOL

    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    They'll just conveniently ignore you lol. Dumb white liberals are still saying that "POC can't be conservative" and that the Conservative voter base is all "old white males".

    I show them the map of the Ontario elections... it just draws a blank. Basically a combination of rural whites and coloured people (Indian, Chinese, even some blacks) in the GTA. It really goes against the narrative that the POC are the most strongly against their beloved pedo sex-ed.
    , @Anonymous

    find you to be quite an entertaining writer. Never found any extremist views in your writings.
     
    How are you defining "extremist"?
  119. @Mr. Anon

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?
     
    That doesn't make one a white nationalist. Based on their public statements regarding the Hart-Cellar Act in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?

    in 1965, Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphery favored maintaining America as majority white. Were they white nationalists?

    Then, no; now, yes.

  120. @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, I've seen the 'Nazi' label applied successively to Colin Jordan's British Movement, the National Front, the BNP, UKIP, and now Farage's Brexit Party.

    The first of these might actually have qualified. The NF and BNP were specifically self-described parties of and for Native British people, UKIP and Brexit Party are citizenist in quite a Sailerish way, both having a fair few minority candidates.

    The qualifications needed to be 'a Nazi' get less and less each year. It can't be long before not acknowledging White Privilege and White Guilt will be sufficient.

    Still, the strategy has been very effective.

    Exactly, and Nigel Farage is so NOT white nationalist it’s quite hilarious actually/ He has said so many things that would contradict that if he were. Plus, there is Raheem Kassam in UKIP(certified muppet)

  121. Well I, Federalist2, was banned. I gotta say it hurts psychologically, even though I can reason about it.

    Of course banning did wonders for my productivity.

  122. @Yaacom

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.
     
    Patton Oswalt referenced isteve, betraying the fact that he was a regular reader of this blog. Since I believe Oswalt to be cynical and conniving, and his primary audiences are earnest and valiant SJW's, I was rather surprised he would make such a foolish misstep into his own shitty mire.

    SJW's are a shirt-sighted and cowardly lot, and the cowardly are often driven by superstition and fancy. Now, their Wizard had travelled to the dark forest, to return with his eyes a-glow, speaking in a dark forest dialect. His followers were not having it, and it blew delirious shit in his surprised, bloated twitter countenance for days.

    He never did it again! 😆

    His dad is a retired Marine pilot who did three tours in Vietnam and named him after George Patton. I believe his dad is flight crash investigator for either the FAA or NTSB. With that background alone he might have some conservative viewpoints on various issues, he does make fun of hippies and vegetarians/vegans in his standup routines.

    • Replies: @Yaacom

    His dad is a retired Marine pilot who did three tours in Vietnam and named him after George Patton. I believe his dad is flight crash investigator for either the FAA or NTSB. With that background alone he might have some conservative viewpoints on various issues
     
    True, but if the dad is too hard on the kid, the kid, because he can’t compete with an overbearing military dad, can turn the other way, an become a liberal from hell. Jim Morrison might be an example.
  123. @Mr. Anon

    The Blacklist
     
    Are you now, or have you ever been, a white nationalist? Can you name some names for us?

    Are you now, or have you ever been, skeptical about the more cultural and racial diversity within a nation, the merrier?

  124. @Peter Johnson
    According to the linked article, anyone who publicly acknowledges a correlation between race and intelligence should be censored from all public discourse. But there is such a correlation and it is manifestly obvious in available data. So how is this supposed to work?

    Truth is no defence in this ol’ po-mo world.

  125. Has the HuffPo seen Gab?

  126. anon[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @ic1000
    > Following Hurricane Katrina, Sailer wrote that African Americans “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.”

    What? Why would anybody say anything like that? Now that this calumny has been brought to the attention of HuffPo readers, it’s ripe for rebuttal.

    C’mon, fellow ultraliberal progressive HuffPo readers, we need to contribute a slew of investigative reporting articles to show how Hurricane Katrina didn’t highlight the idea that urban welfare class Americans possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    Cellphone video footage taken last Saturday night at Baltimore’s Inner Harbor makes the same point (that urban welfare class Americans don’t possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and don’t need stricter moral guidance from society).

    All praise to HuffPo editors for empowering us Outer Party members to take the fight to the White Nationalist enemy!

    When you’re on the street and see or hear disturbing, seemingly aggressive behaviour from a distance or from behind you, your hackles rise. Then you see that the source is from a person with Down Syndrome, and you immediately soften and feel nothing but sympathy and benevolence. The MSM has the same reaction to blacks and Muslims.

  127. @Another Canadian

    To reinforce his point, Trump retweeted Canadian white nationalist Lauren Southern...
     
    The American news media has beat the drum since 2015 that Trump is under the undue influence of foreign agents, creating an enduring aspect of Trump Derangement Syndrome in the minds of millions of people worldwide that is evidence-proof. Isn't that right Mueller? Mueller? MUELLER?

    I have a buddy who matched with her on Tinder.

    It is pretty cool… but at the same time she should be making white babies, not whoring around on Tinder. You know that’s what she does… goes and does her documentary, then “enjoys” the men of whatever country she’s visiting.

  128. anon[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan
    https://twitter.com/lukeobrien/status/1134126101960318976

    How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn't support free speech, then that society will not have free speech.

    Think about some fundamentalist nation with a constitution enshrining the freedom for people to practice the religion of their choice. If society at large does not respect this concept, that right would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

    Likewise if our society becomes intolerant of free speech, we will effectively have no free speech regardless of the government's observance of the first amendment.

    The most famous opinion from Jacobellis, however, was Justice Potter Stewart’s concurrence, holding that the Constitution protected all obscenity except “white nationalism”. He wrote, “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.”[9]

  129. @BengaliCanadianDude
    Funny stuff. I find you to be quite an entertaining writer. Never found any extremist views in your writings. Strange stuff. if you need any non-white supporting you, show them this comment LOL

    They’ll just conveniently ignore you lol. Dumb white liberals are still saying that “POC can’t be conservative” and that the Conservative voter base is all “old white males”.

    I show them the map of the Ontario elections… it just draws a blank. Basically a combination of rural whites and coloured people (Indian, Chinese, even some blacks) in the GTA. It really goes against the narrative that the POC are the most strongly against their beloved pedo sex-ed.

  130. Anonymous[884] • Disclaimer says:
    @BengaliCanadianDude
    Funny stuff. I find you to be quite an entertaining writer. Never found any extremist views in your writings. Strange stuff. if you need any non-white supporting you, show them this comment LOL

    find you to be quite an entertaining writer. Never found any extremist views in your writings.

    How are you defining “extremist”?

    • Replies: @BengaliCanadianDude
    Let's change this around... you seem to think he DOES have "extremist" views in his writing by the way you've written your comment... YOU define what constitutes "extremism" and YOU evince us where he said that. Prove it
  131. @ic1000
    > Following Hurricane Katrina, Sailer wrote that African Americans “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.”

    What? Why would anybody say anything like that? Now that this calumny has been brought to the attention of HuffPo readers, it’s ripe for rebuttal.

    C’mon, fellow ultraliberal progressive HuffPo readers, we need to contribute a slew of investigative reporting articles to show how Hurricane Katrina didn’t highlight the idea that urban welfare class Americans possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    Cellphone video footage taken last Saturday night at Baltimore’s Inner Harbor makes the same point (that urban welfare class Americans don’t possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and don’t need stricter moral guidance from society).

    All praise to HuffPo editors for empowering us Outer Party members to take the fight to the White Nationalist enemy!

    Following Hurricane Katrina, Sailer wrote that African Americans “possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups” and “need stricter moral guidance from society.”

    What? Why would anybody say anything like that? Now that this calumny has been brought to the attention of HuffPo readers, it’s ripe for rebuttal.

    C’mon, fellow ultraliberal progressive HuffPo readers, we need to contribute a slew of investigative reporting articles to show how Hurricane Katrina didn’t highlight the idea that urban welfare class Americans possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    This.

    I think HuffPoers are correct that their cause–establishment minoritarianism/anti-whitism–benefits if they can ban Steve from Twitter.

    However, it’s probably very bad for their cause to publish articles that call attention to Steve and quote him. This is one of these–quite common–cases where progs steeped in their prog world view, point and sputter at stuff (“I can’t even!) that is just so obviously outrageous, to them, but isn’t necessarily going to give normal people, who haven’t drunk their Kool Aid, the vapors.

    Steve’s Katrina comment is certainly outside current standards (i.e. PC) of establishment discourse. But if sometime hears it–particularly someone who remembers those scenes from Katrina, or some other event involving mass black behavior–Steve’s comment isn’t going to seem outrageous at all, and might just pique interest.

  132. @International Jew

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?
     
    Could be soon. Here's my prediction: Edison's demotion from the pantheon will come with a movie about a black laboratory assistant or two that gives them credit for his inventions. It'll be called "Hidden Lightbulbs".

    Dude, didn’t you see the black history month PSA about how the guy who perfected the lightbulb filament was black? They ran in the 80s and 90s.

  133. @dr kill
    This here's the Tiny Ducky, got your ears on, Lenny?

    LOL

    How could I forget the TD?! “Can you back it off a bit, Tiny Ducky, the stupidity is getting mighty IN-tense back here?”

  134. @Jack D
    In all the years that the Left blabbed about the Hollywood Blacklist, I never heard them once say that the studios were not the government and so the Blacklist was fine.

    The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by social media companies ― a distinction seemingly lost on Trump.
     
    I never heard them say "The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by movie studios ― a distinction seemingly lost on us."

    Not once did they say this. Instead they complained endlessly about the blacklist and made movies about its martyrs.

    Hell of a good point, Jack!

  135. @Yaacom

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.
     
    Patton Oswalt referenced isteve, betraying the fact that he was a regular reader of this blog. Since I believe Oswalt to be cynical and conniving, and his primary audiences are earnest and valiant SJW's, I was rather surprised he would make such a foolish misstep into his own shitty mire.

    SJW's are a shirt-sighted and cowardly lot, and the cowardly are often driven by superstition and fancy. Now, their Wizard had travelled to the dark forest, to return with his eyes a-glow, speaking in a dark forest dialect. His followers were not having it, and it blew delirious shit in his surprised, bloated twitter countenance for days.

    He never did it again! 😆

    He never did it again!

    • Replies: @Yaacom
    That just underscores my contention that Patton Oswalt is at the very least a cynical little weasel, if not a borderline sociopath who plays his audience as nitwits. He makes my skin crawl.

    He’s like Gollum before discovering weight-watchers.
  136. @El Dato
    I done forget about things like Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and sundry others.

    While the world won't be suffering under the boot of an African Tribal Leader, which runs affairs only locally, the East Asians cannot be discounted to have a go at World Khanate eventually.

    Dictators who drove their (small) countries into the ground, during their brief reigns. Not the same thing as single party rule of large nation states, for decades, maybe hundreds of years.

    The only real institutions that come close were the Soviet Union, which collapsed, and Mao’s China, which Deng reformed. The latter is the perfect example of why East Asians will not implement 1984 style totalitarianism, or any kind of Khanate.

    You can only do something like that if you are motivated by an emotion like intese passion or hatred. Not an animal emotion, like envy or greed. Something more complex, that motivates action to the point of self abnegation or even self destruction. East Asians aren’t like that. They’re smart, practical, and self-serving. They change course when they have to, and broadly they don’t believe in pursuing things for their own sake.

    In 1984 O’Brien acknowledges that the Inner Party seeks power for it’s own sake, out of a love for it over anything else. That’s not a recipe for happiness. White people are the only people on Earth who can even imagine this way of thinking. Everyone else wants power or money or whatever because of what it can DO for them, not just because they love it in an abstract sense, or because they hate others in an abstract sense.

    Only whites are like that, and they’re disappearing now.

    • Replies: @snorlax

    They’re smart, practical, and self-serving. They change course when they have to, and broadly they don’t believe in pursuing things for their own sake.
     
    Uhhh... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_War
    , @scrivener3
    Its possible people who never experienced power do not appreciate its attractions. People who once have a measure of power seem to cling to it. Why don't Supreme Court justices retire earlier?
  137. @Mr. Anon

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.
     
    Indeed, one could employ that old go-to from the liberal play-book - asking how it is that the other person knows some particular hate-fact, as if the mere knowledge itself were some kind of crime. If some liberal happens to know about Steve Sailer or HBD, you could always ask him "How come you know about such things? Do you read unz.com? Why would you do that?"

    Yeah, Mr. Anon, that’s close to the idea written about on Peak Stupidity in “6 Degrees from Kevin Bacon”. See, the TV financial guy Larry Kudlow was given a hard time by the Lyin’ Press for VDare’s chief Peter Brimelow’s having attended Kudlow’s birthday party. He always went, but the LP got wind of it this time.

    I figure anyone in Mr. Brimelow’s position has taken on a lot of power due to this phenomena. This means he can attend, or threaten to attend, or just slip into a selfie, with any vile opponent he would like to destroy. Evidence of his being in attendance, or pictures, can be used to put the opponent in a very bad light among his peers. “I was there, and he didn’t kick me out of his party!” “Here’s a picture of your ‘journalist’ with me, the head of VDare.com. Just what the hell do you intend to do about this?!”

    Steve Sailer has this power now, whether he knows it or not. Of course, with great power comes great responsibility, blah, blah, sure …

  138. Well how much imagination and actual investment would it take for us to create our own electronic platforms??? As I see a time coming when no one who disagrees with the Left will be allowed on any of the platforms we use today…

    Similar to what Fox News did initially when the Left and political correctness took over the mainstream news media…

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Well how much imagination and actual investment would it take for us to create our own electronic platforms???
     
    No more than a few billions. Small change really. Of course if you looked like being successful you'd be shut down anyway.

    Similar to what Fox News did initially when the Left and political correctness took over the mainstream news media…
     
    You do know that Fox News was established by a billionaire media mogul don't you?

    If you can find a sympathetic billionaire willing to fund you I say go for it.
  139. @Cagey Beast
    Funny how they don't blame you for the Sailer Strategy. Using the Sailer Strategy, Trump turned their universe upside down by winning the presidency in his first shot at elected office ... but it doesn't merit a mention? Boy, is their side stupid!

    Funny how they don’t blame you for the Sailer Strategy.

    They provide a link to a piece about Steve that mentions the Sailer Strategy:

    and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/04/steve-sailer-invented-identity-politics-for-the-alt-right.html

    The Trump strategy looked an awful lot like the Sailer Strategy: the divisive but influential idea that the GOP could run up the electoral score by winning over working-class whites on issues like immigration, first proposed by the conservative writer Steve Sailer in 2000, and summarily rejected by establishment Republicans at the time. Now, 17 years and four presidential cycles later, Sailer, once made a pariah by mainstream conservatives, has quietly become one of the most influential thinkers on the American right.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    They provide a link to a piece about Steve that mentions the Sailer Strategy

    Yes, they're aware of the Sailer Strategy but can't see its significance. In an alternate universe, Steve Sailer would be demonized like Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Carter Page or Julian Assange. Thankfully, the Narrative has settled on the Russian scenario. Saying Trump actually won by speaking for neglected White voters in the Great Lakes states would hurt the Russiagate story-line, not help it.
  140. @Steve Sailer
    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I've never published.

    Hey, all of mine pass the Bechdel test. 😉

  141. “And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.”

  142. @International Jew
    "Her and her cousin Donny", Lol.

    If you look at the page's history (visible only in the page's desktop version) she's the principle author. The Talk page records her efforts (and note her subliterate writing) to keep the Wikipedia editors from deleting her page.

    And delete it they would if they applied their normal standards. Those standards require copious documentation (meaning footnotes to material that's (ideally) published on paper but readily accessible online. They reject anything that looks like advertisement or self-promotion. And they require that the subject be "notable".

    Her page fails all three standards. Though I guess, as #25 on Google's list of "American inventors", she is "notable", albeit in an absurd way.

    I think you mean principal author.

    Sorry, just amusing in context.

  143. @Steve Sailer
    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I've never published.

    But its your secret thoughts that interest the Party!

  144. Anon[307] • Disclaimer says:

    Ugly truth: This will continue until conservatives do the right thing and seize power and ban these extremists. I know that sounds harsh as conservatives generally have principles, even if not all conservatives are principled themselves. But I say don’t be afraid of this option because that’s exactly what the Left is already doing to you anyway, and they openly state as much; this article is just one of hundreds. So, why not ban them first before they can ban you? Why even bother having an election in 2020 if you can’t trust you won’t be horribly oppressed by the victor, Biden or Harris? Trump can’t stay on with the support of the Joint Chiefs? Why turn over power to a group that stole the election through immigration, precluding any chance of any republican winning the White House again?

    Advice: If you are determined not to meet your enemy on an equal field of battle, they will carry the day. The Left wants to fight using undemocratic and authoritarian means and you are not yet willing to meet them on that field of battle, so they are winning the war. I say, however, that you give them that fight in return. In fact, it could start very soon with impeachment. I say, “Bring it on” if that’s what they want. The Huffington Post, the Guardian, Twitter, CNN, MSNBC, the democrat party, and every Russiagate demagogue – ban them all. Isn’t that how the Salem Witch Trials ended, by force after the wrong person was accused? This show trial by the left hasn’t ended because the right hasn’t enacted penalties on the left for engaging in it, so it gets worse over time. What’s that saying about standing up to a schoolyard bully? Deplatform some of these people, and they’ll get the message and stop. If they don’t, keep banning until they do. And in the end,they’ll have no one else to blame but themselves.

    Afterwards, institute diversity quotas for European conservatives in media, finance, law, and the government. Limit immigration and overturn birthright citizenship and the birthright citizenship of every person, since 1980 or so, lacking at least one natural born American parent. That would solve essentially all your major problems overnight. Isn’t that what the left did for themselves anyway – rig the system in their favor through extrajudicial, or at least unfair and unethical, means? So, it would hardly be hypocritical on your part. The United States needs an institutional reset of the kind Francisco Franco gave the Spanish. Either that or secede and have your own country. I’d support either at this point. If the powers that be were forced to choose between fighting a protracted and ugly conflict over an independence movement or clamping down on divisive Leftist extremists, which do you think they would be most inclined to do? The Law of Least Action suggests the latter, so perhaps you should work to give them cause (or the excuse) to do so?

    If anyone has a better idea, I’m willing to listen. In the end, it’s up to you. We all know where this is going if nothing is done.

  145. @International Jew
    Wow! I had no idea. So why did that book I mentioned drop down to the minors so soon? I don't have it anymore (part of a post-empty-nest cleanup) but I'll try to track it down.

    I'm kvelling all the way to the ballpark now...

    Some are halfsies. My guess is 10-20 percent. Used to be lots of Jewish boxers like Slapsie Maxie — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxie_Rosenbloom

  146. @Unladen Swallow
    His dad is a retired Marine pilot who did three tours in Vietnam and named him after George Patton. I believe his dad is flight crash investigator for either the FAA or NTSB. With that background alone he might have some conservative viewpoints on various issues, he does make fun of hippies and vegetarians/vegans in his standup routines.

    His dad is a retired Marine pilot who did three tours in Vietnam and named him after George Patton. I believe his dad is flight crash investigator for either the FAA or NTSB. With that background alone he might have some conservative viewpoints on various issues

    True, but if the dad is too hard on the kid, the kid, because he can’t compete with an overbearing military dad, can turn the other way, an become a liberal from hell. Jim Morrison might be an example.

  147. @Anonymous

    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.
     
    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    Thatr’s a citizenist position.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Thatr’s a citizenist position.

    No, it isn't. It's white nationalist. Are Jews who prefer a Jewish-majority Israel "citizenists"?

  148. @Neil Templeton
    I've been keeping quiet 'cause I'm afraid I'll get called an Eeyore.

    New observations means new data means new hypothesis. This ain’t rocket science. I’ve accepted that currently we have no way to win, therefore shifting resources to the next best strategy: don’t lose in the meantime.

    Steve is gonna wake up one morning to find out his bank closed his checking account due to his being literally Hitler as according to a soyface trust fund baby. He will have zero recourse to appeal being locked out of the banking systems.

  149. Internet was down. Haven’t had time to read the whole thread. Just have to say, I knew Steve was loathsome, but reprllent? I have to change my internet viewing habits.

    *Oh, Derbyshire had a line about him asking Podershertz about a large portion of American jews antipathy to christian whites. He said he (this was before his firing, I think) simply ignored the question and went to someone else.

    Well, Steve, you know what they say about drawing flak…

  150. Goad posted this on Twitter yesterday. This was the most mendacious HuffPo article I’ve had the displeasure of reading. Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”

    Because I burst into flames after reading only a few paragraphs, I did not realise you’d been included amongst its denunciations too, Sailer. It’s funny because among race realists you seem to harbour by far the most positive sentiments about blacks. You were certainly the only writer on Unz to post a nice tribute to Prince when he died.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”
     
    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?
  151. This blacklist thing is good. No such thing as bad publicity.

    It would be in their interest to ignore the right, but the left just can’t help itself.

  152. @Jack D
    In all the years that the Left blabbed about the Hollywood Blacklist, I never heard them once say that the studios were not the government and so the Blacklist was fine.

    The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by social media companies ― a distinction seemingly lost on Trump.
     
    I never heard them say "The First Amendment protects only against government censorship, not decisions made by movie studios ― a distinction seemingly lost on us."

    Not once did they say this. Instead they complained endlessly about the blacklist and made movies about its martyrs.

    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don’t know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    • Replies: @snorlax

    Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?
     
    Number two, and it was all a big joke because they just rehired the same screenwriters under temporary pseudonyms.
    , @Jack D
    It was done for the same reason that social media companies today do it - to get "activists" off their back. Some of those "activists" were in Congress. McCarthy was like Occassional Cortex - someone with a big mouth but little formal power. One Senator or Congresscritter can't force any private business to do anything, they can just yell at them and hold "hearings" and embarrass them.
    , @Forbes
    The Hollywood Ten blacklist was created in 1947--triggered by the editor of The Hollywood Reporter, shall we say, by naming names. The Ten were cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify.

    Senator McCarthy's infamous Army-McCarthy hearings were in 1954.
    , @ben tillman

    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.
     
    You're repeating a Big Lie.

    The name of the committee was House Committee on Un-American Activities. The FAKE denomination you repeat was fabricated to imply that the Committee was engaging in un-American activities itself.
    , @dfordoom

    the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.
     
    Since it was a House committee it could hardly have been run by a senator.
  153. @International Jew
    In my ideal world, the courts would view the First same as they view the Fourteenth. Thus, disrupting Milo Ianopoulos at Berkeley would be prosecuted the same as intimidating blacks who approach voting booths on election day.

    In my ideal world,…

    In my ideal world whenever some one or group has a public speech, you would put forth a counter argument that you might express either at a separate location, or at the same location as the other speaker when they have finished their speech.

    We were always taught that it was best to let unpleasant people speak because they would betray themselves with their own words. Then they couldn’t engender any sympathy by claiming they were denied the right to speak. In fact it was looked upon as a good thing because then a rational, intelligent person could shred the unpleasant person’s position publicly.

    That’s a far cry from what is happening in the 21st century. Now the goal is to do whatever it takes to prevent your opponent from speaking. As you wrote, this action should be looked upon similarly to someone preventing another from voting, or exercising his right to religious freedom.

  154. @Achmed E. Newman
    I wish @RealPresidentDonaldTrump would walk the walk the way he tweets the tweet.

    I wish @RealPresidentDonaldTrump would walk the walk the way he tweets the tweet.

    It’s almost as if he’s just a cynical opportunist whore.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    It’s almost as if he’s just a cynical opportunist whore.
     
    Almost, but not quite, IMO. I think the guy wanted to do some good, and possibly just lucked out (reading Ann Coulter's book?) by homing in on the immigration-invasion problem. He's either been threatened by the Deep State or is just a fool who listens to his son-in-law and hires people who work against his policies (as proposed to Americans when he was a candidate).
  155. @Lowe
    Dictators who drove their (small) countries into the ground, during their brief reigns. Not the same thing as single party rule of large nation states, for decades, maybe hundreds of years.

    The only real institutions that come close were the Soviet Union, which collapsed, and Mao's China, which Deng reformed. The latter is the perfect example of why East Asians will not implement 1984 style totalitarianism, or any kind of Khanate.

    You can only do something like that if you are motivated by an emotion like intese passion or hatred. Not an animal emotion, like envy or greed. Something more complex, that motivates action to the point of self abnegation or even self destruction. East Asians aren't like that. They're smart, practical, and self-serving. They change course when they have to, and broadly they don't believe in pursuing things for their own sake.

    In 1984 O'Brien acknowledges that the Inner Party seeks power for it's own sake, out of a love for it over anything else. That's not a recipe for happiness. White people are the only people on Earth who can even imagine this way of thinking. Everyone else wants power or money or whatever because of what it can DO for them, not just because they love it in an abstract sense, or because they hate others in an abstract sense.

    Only whites are like that, and they're disappearing now.

    They’re smart, practical, and self-serving. They change course when they have to, and broadly they don’t believe in pursuing things for their own sake.

    Uhhh… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_War

  156. @istevefan
    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don't know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    Number two, and it was all a big joke because they just rehired the same screenwriters under temporary pseudonyms.

  157. The travesty is that Steve Sailer’s most notable intellectual accomplishment has nothing to do with race.

    It’s criminal that Sailer’s Law of Female Journalism was not acknowledged: The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    you_will_never_be_daenerys_targaryen.jpg
  158. Anonymous[169] • Disclaimer says:
    @ben tillman

    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?
     
    Thatr's a citizenist position.

    Thatr’s a citizenist position.

    No, it isn’t. It’s white nationalist. Are Jews who prefer a Jewish-majority Israel “citizenists”?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    No, it isn’t. It’s white nationalist.
     
    No, it isn't. A white nationalist doesn't want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.

    The Confederates weren't white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians. Some even wanted to restore that awful pre-1808 open borders policy.

  159. I do need to thank Huffpo for compiling this list. Although I’d heard of many, there were many more I did not know of so now I have a handy list all in one place to find some new content.

  160. @BB753
    Man, Steve, I didn't know you were a dangerous extremist, and I've been reading you since two decades! I guess I'm not good at reading between the lines of your wicked articles. LOL!

    You obviously haven’t invested in a pair of Steve’s Special Spectacles™ to read the ‘invisible’ pixels with the really, really noticing stuff. A snip at only $9.99 and available from all extremist businesses everywhere.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    You obviously haven’t invested in a pair of Steve’s Special Spectacles™ to read the ‘invisible’ pixels with the really, really noticing stuff. A snip at only $9.99 and available from all extremist businesses everywhere.
     
    But the ad has been pulled from the back pages of DC and Marvel.
  161. @Charles Pewitt
    The corporate media -- including the internet corporations -- must be broken up and obliterated.

    The corporate media and the internet corporations have too much power.

    There must be a MAGNA TRUMPY just like the Magna Carta to declare that the corporate media and the internet corporations must never again be allowed to concentrate and hold so much power over mass opinion and mass communications.

    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.

    COMCAST must be destroyed! Just like the Roman said about Carthage.

    GOOGLE must be destroyed.

    I am now starting an exercise program to prepare myself to lead my troops into Philadelphia to legally stop the anti-American scum in the COMCAST organized crime syndicate.

    The White Core American army shall assist any and all patriots -- at the US Justice Department or at some bar somewhere -- who want to curtail the power of the anti-free speech scoundrels in the corporate media and the internet corporations -- especially the COMCAST mob.

    Mount up and ride to the sound of the guns!

    Remember, the Founding Fathers were just live action role playing as Romans and Greeks when they decided that they could get a better deal for themselves outside of the British Empire than within it.

    The US Justice Department mush CRUSH the corporate media and the internet corporations, DAMMIT!

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1134658585391239168

    The corporate media — including the internet corporations — must be broken up and obliterated.

    Agreed. Capitalism is the enemy.

  162. @MalePaleStale
    The travesty is that Steve Sailer's most notable intellectual accomplishment has nothing to do with race.

    It's criminal that Sailer’s Law of Female Journalism was not acknowledged: The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking.

    you_will_never_be_daenerys_targaryen.jpg

  163. @Tono Bungay
    I have recommended Steve Sailer to several people as the best antidote to mainstream cant. One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite. I see him more as a rebutter of unfounded orthodoxy.

    I have recommended Steve Sailer to several people as the best antidote to mainstream cant. One friend described him as a racist, another as an antisemite.

    I don’t dare recommend Steve to any of my friends, he (and a lot of the stuff on Unz) is just too radioactive. He’s been writing crimethink for over two decades – I think I first ran across him on uber-naughty Vdare. I got booted off Free Republic nearly two decades ago for linking to an iSteve article so I find it hard to believe long time readers didn’t know Steve wasn’t persona non grata. I don’t dare follow him on Twitter, people dig through your follows and the web is full of envious nuts who are happy to ruin your life. I’m probably already on some sort of naughty list just following Trump and the other people I do – I fly infrequently and the last two times I flew I’ve been pulled aside for extra screening and I’m heading into grandmother territory. I’ll know for sure if it happens the next time,

  164. @Corvinus
    "How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn’t support free speech, then that society will not have free speech."

    Point taken. However, there will always be debate what constitutes "free speech". As always, context is needed.

    The Supreme Court previously held in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), that the Constitution's Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, that states were free to create laws that restricted freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights (by way of the Tenth Amendment), and that the federal courts could not interfere with the enforcement of such laws. Thus, state governments would be allowed to censor newspapers, magazines, books, plays, movies, and comedy shows. In other words, there was a strict line between federal citizenship and state citizenship (which has changed today).

    In 1925, the decision in Gitlow v. New York ruled that the federal protection of free speech applied also to state governments. The decision was the first in which the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause required state and federal governments to be held to the same standards in regulating speech. The case arose in November 1919 when Benjamin Gitlow, who had served as a local assemblyman, and an associate, Alan Larkin, were arrested by New York City police officers for criminal anarchy, an offense under New York state law. Gitlow and Larkin were both Communist Party members and publishers of The Revolutionary Age, a radical newspaper in which they printed “The Left Wing Manifesto” (modeled on “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels), which advocated the violent overthrow of the federal government.

    Although Gitlow argued at trial that no violent action was precipitated by the article, he was convicted, and the conviction was subsequently upheld by the state appellate court. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court took place in April and November 1923, and the Supreme Court issued its ruling, written by Justice Edward T. Sanford, in June 1925. The court upheld Gitlow’s conviction, but perhaps ironically the ruling expanded free speech protections for individuals, since the court held that the First Amendment was applicable to state governments through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Furthermore, in the history of free speech in our nation, there always have been consequences. Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship. And while their terms of conditions may be arbitrarily applied, with certain undesirable views suddenly purged at a drop of a hat, a person ultimately has the choice to adhere to those terms or seek alternatives. I thought that victimhood only applied to people of color and feminists!

    The Alt Right should be creating their own media and their platforms.

    Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship.

    Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer “platforms”, but “publishers”, and responsible for what they do let through.

    If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn’t an accessory.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer “platforms”, but “publishers”, and responsible for what they do let through."

    Facebook (a platform) enables people (the author) to publish their work. Company property as far as what content is allowed/not allowed. Don't like their rules? Go somewhere else.

    "If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn’t an accessory."

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW's publish radical work, Facebook isn't an accessory.

  165. @Anonymous
    Thatr’s a citizenist position.

    No, it isn't. It's white nationalist. Are Jews who prefer a Jewish-majority Israel "citizenists"?

    No, it isn’t. It’s white nationalist.

    No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.

    The Confederates weren’t white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians. Some even wanted to restore that awful pre-1808 open borders policy.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.
     
    You are in error. That is like saying a Zionist doesn't want Israel to be a Jewish and democratic state, but wants Israel to be Jewish in its entirety, without a single non-Jew there.

    No one is that unreasonable and unrealistic.
    , @Desiderius
    Great distinction. If one has to feed a troll that’s the kind of food necessary.
    , @Corvinus
    "No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety."

    According to Who/Whom?

    "The Confederates weren’t white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians."

    Does that term even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    You have a lot of work ahead of you...
  166. @International Jew

    As of 2000, Dr. Bath was still working on getting FDA approval for her Fecal Probe. Then the trail runs cold.
     
    Not lookin' good for her. So I'm gonna short Dr. Bath and put my money on the current #25, Janet Emerson Bashen. Her patent has actually been approved, making her the first black woman with a software patent to her name. But you'll need to read the Wikipedia article to fully appreciate Bashen's awesomeness.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Emerson_Bashen

    I've said it before but lists of great black scientists and inventors remind me of a (thin) little book I have about great Jewish baseball players, in which long before you get to #10, they're on guys whose career never broke out of the minors!

    The 21st Century has had a fair number of good baseball players who are at least half Jewish. I think Alex Bregman of Houston is full Jewish. He’s leading the American League in homers.

  167. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:
    @Roderick Spode
    Goad posted this on Twitter yesterday. This was the most mendacious HuffPo article I’ve had the displeasure of reading. Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”

    Because I burst into flames after reading only a few paragraphs, I did not realise you’d been included amongst its denunciations too, Sailer. It’s funny because among race realists you seem to harbour by far the most positive sentiments about blacks. You were certainly the only writer on Unz to post a nice tribute to Prince when he died.

    Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”

    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?

    • Replies: @Roderick Spode
    She explicitly denies being one. Is it right or just to ascribe to somebody an ideology they publicly disavow?
    , @Yaacom

    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?
     
    Because it would be misrepresenting the point. It’s not that she prefers people with white skin. She’s concerned with preserving Western European culture, and doesn’t want it replaced/degraded by inferior cultures. The premise is, some cultures are better than others. Unqualified immigration policy is cultural suicide. The overruling culture doesn’t preside by merit. It presides by sheer numbers which are supported by their dying host.
    , @Corvinus
    "What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?"

    Prefer it all you want. It comes down to actually putting it into practice. Do all white men and women have to fall in line for your preference, lest they be considered "race traitors" and "cucks"?
  168. @NYMOM
    Well how much imagination and actual investment would it take for us to create our own electronic platforms??? As I see a time coming when no one who disagrees with the Left will be allowed on any of the platforms we use today...

    Similar to what Fox News did initially when the Left and political correctness took over the mainstream news media...

    Well how much imagination and actual investment would it take for us to create our own electronic platforms???

    No more than a few billions. Small change really. Of course if you looked like being successful you’d be shut down anyway.

    Similar to what Fox News did initially when the Left and political correctness took over the mainstream news media…

    You do know that Fox News was established by a billionaire media mogul don’t you?

    If you can find a sympathetic billionaire willing to fund you I say go for it.

    • Replies: @JackOH
    dfordoom, yep. "Free" speech is extremely expensive. By free speech I mean a line of argument that's weighty, compelling, robust enough to be defensible against attack over and over, is of sufficient duration to draw a constituency (or audience, or market, call it what you want), and can protect its proponents from harassing legal challenges and criminal misconduct, such as assaults by thugs wanting to ingratiate themselves with your opponents.

    I was a smalltime citizen-activist. Effective enough that I got whomped on. (The back story's TL:dr.) Finally I threw in the towel. I would have continued had some big-bucks type offered me income protection through a fat salary and outright grant money, legal help, etc. That wasn't going to happen.

    I'm skeptical that rhetorical freedoms guaranteed by such as the First Amendment, academic tenure, and so on actually exist, but you have to look at the subject matter on a case-by-case basis to gauge whether circumstantial censorship has destroyed our ability to solve problems.
  169. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    No, it isn’t. It’s white nationalist.
     
    No, it isn't. A white nationalist doesn't want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.

    The Confederates weren't white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians. Some even wanted to restore that awful pre-1808 open borders policy.

    No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.

    You are in error. That is like saying a Zionist doesn’t want Israel to be a Jewish and democratic state, but wants Israel to be Jewish in its entirety, without a single non-Jew there.

    No one is that unreasonable and unrealistic.

  170. @dfordoom

    Well how much imagination and actual investment would it take for us to create our own electronic platforms???
     
    No more than a few billions. Small change really. Of course if you looked like being successful you'd be shut down anyway.

    Similar to what Fox News did initially when the Left and political correctness took over the mainstream news media…
     
    You do know that Fox News was established by a billionaire media mogul don't you?

    If you can find a sympathetic billionaire willing to fund you I say go for it.

    dfordoom, yep. “Free” speech is extremely expensive. By free speech I mean a line of argument that’s weighty, compelling, robust enough to be defensible against attack over and over, is of sufficient duration to draw a constituency (or audience, or market, call it what you want), and can protect its proponents from harassing legal challenges and criminal misconduct, such as assaults by thugs wanting to ingratiate themselves with your opponents.

    I was a smalltime citizen-activist. Effective enough that I got whomped on. (The back story’s TL:dr.) Finally I threw in the towel. I would have continued had some big-bucks type offered me income protection through a fat salary and outright grant money, legal help, etc. That wasn’t going to happen.

    I’m skeptical that rhetorical freedoms guaranteed by such as the First Amendment, academic tenure, and so on actually exist, but you have to look at the subject matter on a case-by-case basis to gauge whether circumstantial censorship has destroyed our ability to solve problems.

    • Agree: Autochthon
  171. @Moses
    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a European face...forever.

    If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a European face…forever.

  172. @MEH 0910

    Funny how they don’t blame you for the Sailer Strategy.
     
    They provide a link to a piece about Steve that mentions the Sailer Strategy:

    and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/04/steve-sailer-invented-identity-politics-for-the-alt-right.html

    The Trump strategy looked an awful lot like the Sailer Strategy: the divisive but influential idea that the GOP could run up the electoral score by winning over working-class whites on issues like immigration, first proposed by the conservative writer Steve Sailer in 2000, and summarily rejected by establishment Republicans at the time. Now, 17 years and four presidential cycles later, Sailer, once made a pariah by mainstream conservatives, has quietly become one of the most influential thinkers on the American right.
     

    They provide a link to a piece about Steve that mentions the Sailer Strategy

    Yes, they’re aware of the Sailer Strategy but can’t see its significance. In an alternate universe, Steve Sailer would be demonized like Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Carter Page or Julian Assange. Thankfully, the Narrative has settled on the Russian scenario. Saying Trump actually won by speaking for neglected White voters in the Great Lakes states would hurt the Russiagate story-line, not help it.

  173. Just now I found another example of a positive trend I’ve noticed: more and more lefties are getting annoyed by the social media snitches and tattle-tales.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    This story of blue-checkmarked vigilantes going after a pro-Trump day labourer looks looks interesting:

    https://twitter.com/NoahShachtman/status/1134974686780100608

    https://twitter.com/bigleaguepol/status/1135053217581195264
    , @Jack D
    The only reason they are upset is because the guy that was doxxed is black. If he had been some deporable white guy from some deplorable state, they would have been totally down with doxxing him, even (especially) if he was a blue collar white.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Glenn Greenwald is a lefty but an honest one. He probably only get away with his CrimeSpeak because he's gay. Tucker has him on from time to time.
  174. @dfordoom

    I wish @RealPresidentDonaldTrump would walk the walk the way he tweets the tweet.
     
    It's almost as if he's just a cynical opportunist whore.

    It’s almost as if he’s just a cynical opportunist whore.

    Almost, but not quite, IMO. I think the guy wanted to do some good, and possibly just lucked out (reading Ann Coulter’s book?) by homing in on the immigration-invasion problem. He’s either been threatened by the Deep State or is just a fool who listens to his son-in-law and hires people who work against his policies (as proposed to Americans when he was a candidate).

  175. Anon[483] • Disclaimer says:

    Eric Kaufmann in Whiteshift collects and analyzes a huge number of public opinion surveys (and even does his own ad hoc surveys on Mechanical Turk).

    If I remember correctly, he found that for that most part American blacks, Hispanics, and Asians are, technically speaking, white supremacists.

    Various researchers have conducted clever surveys in which all minorities reveal themselves to prefer living in a society in which whites dominate, and are not excited about an America where blacks or Hispanics or Asians are running things.

    They want fair access to the good stuff, but they seem to think that it’s more likely that there’ll be a lot of good stuff if the status quo doesn’t change too much. At the minimum they don’t want to be subjected to a huge social experiment that may or may not turn out well.

  176. @istevefan
    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don't know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    It was done for the same reason that social media companies today do it – to get “activists” off their back. Some of those “activists” were in Congress. McCarthy was like Occassional Cortex – someone with a big mouth but little formal power. One Senator or Congresscritter can’t force any private business to do anything, they can just yell at them and hold “hearings” and embarrass them.

  177. @Lowe
    Dictators who drove their (small) countries into the ground, during their brief reigns. Not the same thing as single party rule of large nation states, for decades, maybe hundreds of years.

    The only real institutions that come close were the Soviet Union, which collapsed, and Mao's China, which Deng reformed. The latter is the perfect example of why East Asians will not implement 1984 style totalitarianism, or any kind of Khanate.

    You can only do something like that if you are motivated by an emotion like intese passion or hatred. Not an animal emotion, like envy or greed. Something more complex, that motivates action to the point of self abnegation or even self destruction. East Asians aren't like that. They're smart, practical, and self-serving. They change course when they have to, and broadly they don't believe in pursuing things for their own sake.

    In 1984 O'Brien acknowledges that the Inner Party seeks power for it's own sake, out of a love for it over anything else. That's not a recipe for happiness. White people are the only people on Earth who can even imagine this way of thinking. Everyone else wants power or money or whatever because of what it can DO for them, not just because they love it in an abstract sense, or because they hate others in an abstract sense.

    Only whites are like that, and they're disappearing now.

    Its possible people who never experienced power do not appreciate its attractions. People who once have a measure of power seem to cling to it. Why don’t Supreme Court justices retire earlier?

  178. @Cagey Beast
    Just now I found another example of a positive trend I've noticed: more and more lefties are getting annoyed by the social media snitches and tattle-tales.

    https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1135030189858205696

    https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1135012565342441472

    This story of blue-checkmarked vigilantes going after a pro-Trump day labourer looks looks interesting:

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I don't want to flood this comment section with tweets but this case seems pertinent. Here's the mangy attack dog's explanation:


    Kevin Poulsen
    Verified account @kpoulsen
    15h
    NEW: I went looking for the Russian troll behind the 'Drunk Pelosi' viral video hoax. Turns out he's an itinerant forklift operator from the Bronx who's been secretly running hard-right "news" outlets across social media for years. Also, not Russian.
     
    , @Jack D
    Who will dox the doxxers?
  179. @Cagey Beast
    This story of blue-checkmarked vigilantes going after a pro-Trump day labourer looks looks interesting:

    https://twitter.com/NoahShachtman/status/1134974686780100608

    https://twitter.com/bigleaguepol/status/1135053217581195264

    I don’t want to flood this comment section with tweets but this case seems pertinent. Here’s the mangy attack dog’s explanation:

    Kevin Poulsen
    Verified account @kpoulsen
    15h
    NEW: I went looking for the Russian troll behind the ‘Drunk Pelosi’ viral video hoax. Turns out he’s an itinerant forklift operator from the Bronx who’s been secretly running hard-right “news” outlets across social media for years. Also, not Russian.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1135227647838081028
  180. @MikeatMikedotMike
    "Steve Sailer is a former National Review writer who popularized the term “human bio-diversity” ― another name for scientific racism ― and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”"

    Actually, Steve did neither of those. A black woman in his basement came up with both.

    For the record, bored identity is here only for that Salieri guy’s movie reviews…, and golf.

    And, what is Tweerter?

  181. Why would you mock the Jew? Whatever else Harvey is he’s still Jewish.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.
  182. TWS says:
    @Corvinus
    "How many times do people have to explain that Freedom of Speech and the 1st Amendment are not the same thing? If society at large doesn’t support free speech, then that society will not have free speech."

    Point taken. However, there will always be debate what constitutes "free speech". As always, context is needed.

    The Supreme Court previously held in Barron v. Baltimore (1833), that the Constitution's Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, that states were free to create laws that restricted freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights (by way of the Tenth Amendment), and that the federal courts could not interfere with the enforcement of such laws. Thus, state governments would be allowed to censor newspapers, magazines, books, plays, movies, and comedy shows. In other words, there was a strict line between federal citizenship and state citizenship (which has changed today).

    In 1925, the decision in Gitlow v. New York ruled that the federal protection of free speech applied also to state governments. The decision was the first in which the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause required state and federal governments to be held to the same standards in regulating speech. The case arose in November 1919 when Benjamin Gitlow, who had served as a local assemblyman, and an associate, Alan Larkin, were arrested by New York City police officers for criminal anarchy, an offense under New York state law. Gitlow and Larkin were both Communist Party members and publishers of The Revolutionary Age, a radical newspaper in which they printed “The Left Wing Manifesto” (modeled on “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels), which advocated the violent overthrow of the federal government.

    Although Gitlow argued at trial that no violent action was precipitated by the article, he was convicted, and the conviction was subsequently upheld by the state appellate court. Oral arguments before the Supreme Court took place in April and November 1923, and the Supreme Court issued its ruling, written by Justice Edward T. Sanford, in June 1925. The court upheld Gitlow’s conviction, but perhaps ironically the ruling expanded free speech protections for individuals, since the court held that the First Amendment was applicable to state governments through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Furthermore, in the history of free speech in our nation, there always have been consequences. Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship. And while their terms of conditions may be arbitrarily applied, with certain undesirable views suddenly purged at a drop of a hat, a person ultimately has the choice to adhere to those terms or seek alternatives. I thought that victimhood only applied to people of color and feminists!

    The Alt Right should be creating their own media and their platforms.

    You are aware the 14th cuts that away? You are aware that if you monitor and edit speech you are no longer a carrier but a publisher thus your protection is null and void. It’s almost as if you’re trying to get it wrong as long as it supports your view you’re a special smart boy.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You are aware the 14th cuts that away? You are aware that if you monitor and edit speech you are no longer a carrier but a publisher thus your protection is null and void."

    What federal court cases have been involved here that cited the 14th Amendment for the situation you give?
  183. @The Alarmist

    Steve Sailer is a former National Review writer who popularized the term “human bio-diversity” ― another name for scientific racism ― and was described as the “man who invented identity politics for the New Right.”
     
    I am indeed humbled to have my comments accepted to appear alongside the works of one of our truly great modern thinkers.

    Speak for yourself.

    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.

    That’s mostly because bored identity’s white liver and blackened heart possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist

    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.
     
    That's truly sad!
    , @bored identity
    Oh, that's really nothing;

    You should see Tiny Duck's subscription roster.
    , @bored identity
    Oh, that's really nothing;

    You should see Tiny Duck's subscription roster.
  184. Sean says:

    POLITICS
    17/07/2015 14:31 BST | Updated 17/07/2015 19:07 BST
    A Note About Our Coverage Of Donald Trump’s ‘Campaign’
    By Ryan Grim
    Danny Shea, HuffPost US

    After watching and listening to Donald Trump since he announced his candidacy for president, we have decided we won’t report on Trump’s campaign as part of The Huffington Post’s political coverage. Instead, we will cover his campaign as part of our Entertainment section. Our reason is simple: Trump’s campaign is a sideshow. We won’t take the bait. If you are interested in what The Donald has to say, you’ll find it next to our stories on the Kardashians and The Bachelorette.

  185. @Anonymous

    find you to be quite an entertaining writer. Never found any extremist views in your writings.
     
    How are you defining "extremist"?

    Let’s change this around… you seem to think he DOES have “extremist” views in his writing by the way you’ve written your comment… YOU define what constitutes “extremism” and YOU evince us where he said that. Prove it

  186. @Anonymous

    So Huffpo has taken to just straight-up lying. Steve isn’t a white nationalist. Never has been. Any white nationalist would tell you so too.
     
    Does Steve not favor maintaining America as majority White?

    Steve is not a white nationalist

  187. @El Dato
    That Facehugger Post hit-piece was written by "Luke O'Brien, Senior Reporter, HuffPost"

    But here is something more:

    It’s Not Your Imagination: The Journalists Writing About Antifa Are Often Their Cheerleaders


    Christopher Mathias, a senior reporter for the Huffington Post, applies the same cynical approach. Like Wilson, Mathias’ byline seems to pop up whenever Antifa stages violent protests—and he always can be counted on to deliver a play-by-play that favors Antifa. But he goes even further than his Guardian counterpart [Jason Wilson ]. Unlike Wilson, Mathias actually doxes individuals whom he suspects of being right-wing extremists. His doxing sources for an article about suspected extremists in the U.S. military included Unicorn Riot, an anarchic Antifa journalist collective, and other shady sites that exist as a sort of in-house 4chan for the Antifa movement. (Mathias cited similar sources when he published identifying details of a Texas schoolteacher, and of a Virginia police officer.)

    Mathias’ apparent modus operandi is to gather doxes of individuals whom Antifa or Antifa-friendly groups suspect of being right-wing extremists. He (or a colleague) at Huffington Post then reach out to the target’s employer asking for comment, leveraging the media outlet’s name to ensure the individual is called out. Then Mathias posts the doxes in his column while investigations are ongoing. As with Emily Gorcenski’s First Vigil site, Mathias broadcasts detailed personal information whose release seems designed to destroy the reputation of the accused, no matter the results of any subsequent investigation. It’s unclear how this behavior differs from ordinary, everyday Antifa-style online activism.
     

    White Helmets and Antifa are two sides of the same coin.

    Alas, Twitter lost no time in permabanning the man who connected the dots:

    Twitter has suspended the account of Eoin Lenihan, a researcher who mapped out connections between mainstream journalists and the violent far-left Antifa movement on Twitter, following a mass-reporting campaign by left-wing activists.

    Naturally, all of the charts and graphs with which Lenihan connected the breadcrumb trail have now been removed as well.

    If a tree falls in the forest, and Chase Manhattan Bank closes the accounts of anyone in earshot….did it really fall at all?

    • LOL: Unladen Swallow
  188. @Anonymous

    Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”
     
    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?

    She explicitly denies being one. Is it right or just to ascribe to somebody an ideology they publicly disavow?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    How does she define the term at issue? Does she object to wanting Japan to remain majority Japanese? To China remaining majority Han? To Israel remaining majority Jewish? If not, why does she disavow a desire for the countries of the West to remain majority White? Why does she discriminate against Whites?
  189. @Reg Cæsar

    Remember, the 1st Amendment protects citizens against government censorship, not company censorship.
     
    Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer "platforms", but "publishers", and responsible for what they do let through.

    If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn't an accessory.

    “Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer “platforms”, but “publishers”, and responsible for what they do let through.”

    Facebook (a platform) enables people (the author) to publish their work. Company property as far as what content is allowed/not allowed. Don’t like their rules? Go somewhere else.

    “If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn’t an accessory.”

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW’s publish radical work, Facebook isn’t an accessory.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW’s publish radical work, Facebook isn’t an accessory.
     
    Define "White Nationalist".
    , @Reg Cæsar
    If you censor some, but not all, then you are taking sides, and exposing yourself to litigation should the side you implicitly approve do something nasty with your inspiration.

    That's the difference between a platform and a publisher.

    On top of that, there is the matter of consumer fraud. If you sell yourself as a bastion of free speech and independence, you had better be literal and even-handed in your application of your terms of service.

    If you allow "white people suck", but disallow more specific segments of "white people suck", explain why this isn't fraud.
  190. Anonymous[327] • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer “platforms”, but “publishers”, and responsible for what they do let through."

    Facebook (a platform) enables people (the author) to publish their work. Company property as far as what content is allowed/not allowed. Don't like their rules? Go somewhere else.

    "If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn’t an accessory."

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW's publish radical work, Facebook isn't an accessory.

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW’s publish radical work, Facebook isn’t an accessory.

    Define “White Nationalist”.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Define “White Nationalist”."

    A person who is white who seeks, at worst, a white dominated ethno-state which controls the non-white opposition, or, at best, a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    So, how would you define "white"?
  191. @Cagey Beast
    I don't want to flood this comment section with tweets but this case seems pertinent. Here's the mangy attack dog's explanation:


    Kevin Poulsen
    Verified account @kpoulsen
    15h
    NEW: I went looking for the Russian troll behind the 'Drunk Pelosi' viral video hoax. Turns out he's an itinerant forklift operator from the Bronx who's been secretly running hard-right "news" outlets across social media for years. Also, not Russian.
     

  192. @El Dato
    Tesla was not black!

    But apparently got thoroughly patriarch'd and made unemployable by Edison.

    https://i.imgur.com/o7nSWK5.png

    https://i.imgur.com/P9xz92w.png

    bored identity strongly believes that every.single.time Marvel waits to happen to any foreign born person with a special gift:

    (Although – as y’all can see – sometimes even almighty Kal -El has to bite his upper lip while listening to some of Super Colon Powells That Be camel turds )

  193. @MEH 0910

    He never did it again!
     
    https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1086691179855400960?lang=en
    https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1086819003652136960?lang=en

    That just underscores my contention that Patton Oswalt is at the very least a cynical little weasel, if not a borderline sociopath who plays his audience as nitwits. He makes my skin crawl.

    He’s like Gollum before discovering weight-watchers.

  194. @Anonymous

    Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”
     
    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?

    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?

    Because it would be misrepresenting the point. It’s not that she prefers people with white skin. She’s concerned with preserving Western European culture, and doesn’t want it replaced/degraded by inferior cultures. The premise is, some cultures are better than others. Unqualified immigration policy is cultural suicide. The overruling culture doesn’t preside by merit. It presides by sheer numbers which are supported by their dying host.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The premise is, some cultures are better than others."

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?
    , @Anonymous

    Because it would be misrepresenting the point. It’s not that she prefers people with white skin. She’s concerned with preserving Western European culture, and doesn’t want it replaced/degraded by inferior cultures. The premise is, some cultures are better than others. Unqualified immigration policy is cultural suicide. The overruling culture doesn’t preside by merit. It presides by sheer numbers which are supported by their dying host.
     
    The question is: Does she want there to be white majorities in the nation states of the West?

    If she does, she is a white nationalist.
  195. @istevefan
    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don't know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    The Hollywood Ten blacklist was created in 1947–triggered by the editor of The Hollywood Reporter, shall we say, by naming names. The Ten were cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify.

    Senator McCarthy’s infamous Army-McCarthy hearings were in 1954.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I could see the current Dem controlled Congress calling people on the HuffPo list to testify. They'd try to find the dumbest ones so they wouldn't make the Congresscritters look bad. They wouldn't dare call Steve . He'd tell Occasional Cortex, "At long last, have you no sense of decency!"
  196. Will they try to de-person Marginal Revolution for picking up so much of Steve’s stuff?

  197. @Corvinus
    "Ah, but once they censor, they are no longer “platforms”, but “publishers”, and responsible for what they do let through."

    Facebook (a platform) enables people (the author) to publish their work. Company property as far as what content is allowed/not allowed. Don't like their rules? Go somewhere else.

    "If you call in a bomb threat, the phone company isn’t an accessory."

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW's publish radical work, Facebook isn't an accessory.

    If you censor some, but not all, then you are taking sides, and exposing yourself to litigation should the side you implicitly approve do something nasty with your inspiration.

    That’s the difference between a platform and a publisher.

    On top of that, there is the matter of consumer fraud. If you sell yourself as a bastion of free speech and independence, you had better be literal and even-handed in your application of your terms of service.

    If you allow “white people suck”, but disallow more specific segments of “white people suck”, explain why this isn’t fraud.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "If you censor some, but not all, then you are taking sides, and exposing yourself to litigation should the side you implicitly approve do something nasty with your inspiration."

    Regardless if you censor some or all, the platform is taking a side, one that unfortunately employs its standards arbitrarily. Furthermore, that platform has deep pockets, and the opposing side has to prove definitively in a court of law that th

    "That’s the difference between a platform and a publisher."

    No. The platform gives the opportunity for a user to publish their work. The user agrees to terms. He/she/it is give permission to use that property. Again, build your own platforms.

    "On top of that, there is the matter of consumer fraud. If you sell yourself as a bastion of free speech and independence, you had better be literal and even-handed in your application of your terms of service."

    I understand. Yet, it is up to the publisher who is using the platform to definitively prove that their "free speech" rights are being taken away.

    "If you allow “white people suck”, but disallow more specific segments of “white people suck”, explain why this isn’t fraud."

    Depends upon the intent and the context.
  198. @Simon Tugmutton
    You obviously haven't invested in a pair of Steve's Special Spectacles™ to read the 'invisible' pixels with the really, really noticing stuff. A snip at only $9.99 and available from all extremist businesses everywhere.

    You obviously haven’t invested in a pair of Steve’s Special Spectacles™ to read the ‘invisible’ pixels with the really, really noticing stuff. A snip at only $9.99 and available from all extremist businesses everywhere.

    But the ad has been pulled from the back pages of DC and Marvel.

  199. @Reg Cæsar

    No, it isn’t. It’s white nationalist.
     
    No, it isn't. A white nationalist doesn't want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.

    The Confederates weren't white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians. Some even wanted to restore that awful pre-1808 open borders policy.

    Great distinction. If one has to feed a troll that’s the kind of food necessary.

  200. @Anonymous

    Right. White Nationalists or SJW’s publish radical work, Facebook isn’t an accessory.
     
    Define "White Nationalist".

    “Define “White Nationalist”.”

    A person who is white who seeks, at worst, a white dominated ethno-state which controls the non-white opposition, or, at best, a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    So, how would you define “white”?

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.
     
    You've fallen prey to an anti-White rhetorical trick, or you are dishonestly trying to insert a straw man into the discussion.

    A White nationalist simply wants a nation-state that is majority or predominantly White. It doesn't require "removing" nonwhites. Just as one can be a Jewish nationalist without intending to remove all Gentiles from Palestine, and a Japanese nationalist without removing all Koreans from Japan, and a Chinese nationalist without removing all non-Han from China.

    , @Neil Templeton

    So, how would you define “white”?
     
    In almost every definition, ravens and crows do not qualify. Limited exception: magpie.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.
     
    San Francisco! Washington, DC!


    S.F. Could Be Much Whiter in 25 Years, While the Rest of Region Gets More Diverse

    (There is far less segregation aimed at blacks in San Francisco now-- because there are far fewer blacks: Segregation and the Civil Rights Movement in San Francisco)


    https://haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/sf_di_oct18_rev.png


    https://sites.psu.edu/benwinston/files/2017/12/F6-1mwbb3a-768x472.png

  201. @Reg Cæsar
    If you censor some, but not all, then you are taking sides, and exposing yourself to litigation should the side you implicitly approve do something nasty with your inspiration.

    That's the difference between a platform and a publisher.

    On top of that, there is the matter of consumer fraud. If you sell yourself as a bastion of free speech and independence, you had better be literal and even-handed in your application of your terms of service.

    If you allow "white people suck", but disallow more specific segments of "white people suck", explain why this isn't fraud.

    “If you censor some, but not all, then you are taking sides, and exposing yourself to litigation should the side you implicitly approve do something nasty with your inspiration.”

    Regardless if you censor some or all, the platform is taking a side, one that unfortunately employs its standards arbitrarily. Furthermore, that platform has deep pockets, and the opposing side has to prove definitively in a court of law that th

    “That’s the difference between a platform and a publisher.”

    No. The platform gives the opportunity for a user to publish their work. The user agrees to terms. He/she/it is give permission to use that property. Again, build your own platforms.

    “On top of that, there is the matter of consumer fraud. If you sell yourself as a bastion of free speech and independence, you had better be literal and even-handed in your application of your terms of service.”

    I understand. Yet, it is up to the publisher who is using the platform to definitively prove that their “free speech” rights are being taken away.

    “If you allow “white people suck”, but disallow more specific segments of “white people suck”, explain why this isn’t fraud.”

    Depends upon the intent and the context.

  202. @Reg Cæsar

    No, it isn’t. It’s white nationalist.
     
    No, it isn't. A white nationalist doesn't want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.

    The Confederates weren't white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians. Some even wanted to restore that awful pre-1808 open borders policy.

    “No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety.”

    According to Who/Whom?

    “The Confederates weren’t white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians.”

    Does that term even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    You have a lot of work ahead of you…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    He is pretty confused in this thread.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    You have a lot of work ahead of you…
     
    Hardly. The CSA was fighting for a much more racially diverse union than the one they were in. I rest my case:

    https://www-tc.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/wp-content/themes/many-rivers-to-cross/views/timeline/images/chapter2/manyrivers.cp2.5.bg.png
  203. @Anonymous

    Among other things it describes Lauren Southern as a “white nationalist.”
     
    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?

    “What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?”

    Prefer it all you want. It comes down to actually putting it into practice. Do all white men and women have to fall in line for your preference, lest they be considered “race traitors” and “cucks”?

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Prefer it all you want. It comes down to actually putting it into practice.
     
    If the preference is legitimate--and you imply that it is--what is wrong with putting it into practice?
  204. @Yaacom

    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?
     
    Because it would be misrepresenting the point. It’s not that she prefers people with white skin. She’s concerned with preserving Western European culture, and doesn’t want it replaced/degraded by inferior cultures. The premise is, some cultures are better than others. Unqualified immigration policy is cultural suicide. The overruling culture doesn’t preside by merit. It presides by sheer numbers which are supported by their dying host.

    “The premise is, some cultures are better than others.”

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?

    • Replies: @scrivener3

    “The premise is, some cultures are better than others.”

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?
     
    Here's a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.
  205. @Forbes
    The Hollywood Ten blacklist was created in 1947--triggered by the editor of The Hollywood Reporter, shall we say, by naming names. The Ten were cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify.

    Senator McCarthy's infamous Army-McCarthy hearings were in 1954.

    I could see the current Dem controlled Congress calling people on the HuffPo list to testify. They’d try to find the dumbest ones so they wouldn’t make the Congresscritters look bad. They wouldn’t dare call Steve . He’d tell Occasional Cortex, “At long last, have you no sense of decency!”

  206. @TWS
    Why would you mock the Jew? Whatever else Harvey is he's still Jewish.

    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Weinstein has that in common with Trump.

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/farrow-on-cnn-israel-s-black-cube-behind-trump-echo-chamber-memo-1.6414524
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.
     
    If there is dirt on John Podhoretz, it could probably get through the Hays Code, and be broadcast in prime time.
    , @TWS
    Pod the lesser?
  207. Anonymous[951] • Disclaimer says:
    @Yaacom

    She probably is. What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?
     
    Because it would be misrepresenting the point. It’s not that she prefers people with white skin. She’s concerned with preserving Western European culture, and doesn’t want it replaced/degraded by inferior cultures. The premise is, some cultures are better than others. Unqualified immigration policy is cultural suicide. The overruling culture doesn’t preside by merit. It presides by sheer numbers which are supported by their dying host.

    Because it would be misrepresenting the point. It’s not that she prefers people with white skin. She’s concerned with preserving Western European culture, and doesn’t want it replaced/degraded by inferior cultures. The premise is, some cultures are better than others. Unqualified immigration policy is cultural suicide. The overruling culture doesn’t preside by merit. It presides by sheer numbers which are supported by their dying host.

    The question is: Does she want there to be white majorities in the nation states of the West?

    If she does, she is a white nationalist.

  208. Anonymous[951] • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "What is wrong with preferring there be white majorities for the countries of Europe and the Anglosphere?"

    Prefer it all you want. It comes down to actually putting it into practice. Do all white men and women have to fall in line for your preference, lest they be considered "race traitors" and "cucks"?

    Prefer it all you want. It comes down to actually putting it into practice.

    If the preference is legitimate–and you imply that it is–what is wrong with putting it into practice?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "If the preference is legitimate–and you imply that it is–what is wrong with putting it into practice?"

    Go right ahead. You talk a good game, now do it! Are you prepared to go all the way, even risking life and limb?
  209. Anonymous[951] • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety."

    According to Who/Whom?

    "The Confederates weren’t white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians."

    Does that term even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    You have a lot of work ahead of you...

    He is pretty confused in this thread.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    He is pretty confused in this thread.
     
    Who, me? Compare the preferred direction of African movement across the sea of the Republicans and of the Confederates, and tell me which side was "celebrating diversity".
  210. Anonymous[951] • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "Define “White Nationalist”."

    A person who is white who seeks, at worst, a white dominated ethno-state which controls the non-white opposition, or, at best, a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    So, how would you define "white"?

    a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    You’ve fallen prey to an anti-White rhetorical trick, or you are dishonestly trying to insert a straw man into the discussion.

    A White nationalist simply wants a nation-state that is majority or predominantly White. It doesn’t require “removing” nonwhites. Just as one can be a Jewish nationalist without intending to remove all Gentiles from Palestine, and a Japanese nationalist without removing all Koreans from Japan, and a Chinese nationalist without removing all non-Han from China.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You’ve fallen prey to an anti-White rhetorical trick, or you are dishonestly trying to insert a straw man into the discussion."

    Looks like you are making things up as you go along.

    "A White nationalist simply wants a nation-state that is majority or predominantly White. It doesn’t require “removing” nonwhites".

    They COULD want that, or they COULD want more. There are white nationalists who demand that non-whites be purged. Remember the phrase "that is what separate nations are for".

    "Just as one can be a Jewish nationalist without intending to remove all Gentiles from Palestine..."

    Have you even talked to a Jewish nationalist lately? They certainly aspire to remove the Palestinians by hook or by crook.

    "and a Japanese nationalist without removing all Koreans from Japan, and a Chinese nationalist without removing all non-Han from China."

    Except the problem, as we clearly see today, is that the non-whites in the States and Europe constantly make matters worse with their presence. That is why we can't have nice things.

    See, in order for whites to be dominant, they have to control the institutions, which in the end will mandate force. Are you willing to shed blood for your white ethno-state? Furthermore, how do you plan addressing those whites who oppose its creation?

    You really haven't thought things through...

    , @Mr. Anon
    You are making the mistake of assuming that "Corvinus" is a rational actor and/or acting in good faith. He isn't and he isn't. He is a stupid brain-washed dolt. You may as well carry on a discussion with a parrot.
  211. Anonymous[951] • Disclaimer says:
    @Roderick Spode
    She explicitly denies being one. Is it right or just to ascribe to somebody an ideology they publicly disavow?

    How does she define the term at issue? Does she object to wanting Japan to remain majority Japanese? To China remaining majority Han? To Israel remaining majority Jewish? If not, why does she disavow a desire for the countries of the West to remain majority White? Why does she discriminate against Whites?

    • Replies: @Roderick Spode
    Whoa there, I am WN myself (or a fellow-traveller at very least); you don't need to tell me! But the fact remains that Southern wants White societies to retain a white majority but does not not oppose limited nonwhite immigration. She explicitly rejects the WN label.
  212. @Corvinus
    "Define “White Nationalist”."

    A person who is white who seeks, at worst, a white dominated ethno-state which controls the non-white opposition, or, at best, a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    So, how would you define "white"?

    So, how would you define “white”?

    In almost every definition, ravens and crows do not qualify. Limited exception: magpie.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "In almost every definition, ravens and crows do not qualify. Limited exception: magpie."

    We're speaking about humans here, not birds. Perhaps you are confusing this thread with your Looney Tunes marathon. Cue the chicken hawk...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2nuOneeQ5M

  213. @Cagey Beast
    This story of blue-checkmarked vigilantes going after a pro-Trump day labourer looks looks interesting:

    https://twitter.com/NoahShachtman/status/1134974686780100608

    https://twitter.com/bigleaguepol/status/1135053217581195264

    Who will dox the doxxers?

  214. @Autochthon

    Toward the end of April, it became clear why, as Dorsey slouched into the Oval Office to meet his most controversial customer product.
     
    I've fixed this bit; the popularity of this stupidity is maddening. Donald Trump does not pay a dime to Twitter. Twitter makes money* from advertising (i.e., selling its users' attention) and by directly selling data about its users, mostly via application-programming interfaces (who they are, what they read, what they endorse, who they are connected to, etc.). In other words, the very people these dumbasses call Twitter's customers are in fact its products. Can you imagine a hooker being called a pimp's customer?! That's the level of stupidity (or, more likely, disingenuous evil) we are working with here, folks. Twitter's customer's are the likes of Coca-Cola and eMpTyVee (for advertising) and bastards like Snaptrends, Mention, Intutel, Awario, and Brandwatch (to collect obscene amount of data about you that you provided for free, then resell it at great profit).

    If you've never heard of the second lot, that is by design: the game only profits its organisers if indeed the products – Donald Trump, your Auntie Karen, whomever – believe they are some kind of "customer" being provided a service. This also leads to misguided expectations of privacy, rights in the platform, and so on.

    Sure, some clever folks – Donald Trump, Justin Beiber, Jojo Siwa – use these platforms to benefit themselves, but that's not to say even then that they are customers. At best they've achieved a coincidental symbiosis. Doing a Stupic Human Trick on Late Night might make you rich and famous, I guess, but Letterman's people didn't book you to advance your career – they booked you because they decided you would entice people to watch the show, in turn enabling them to sell advertising....

    *What money it does make; like many such outfits, it's mostly a giant bubble of speculation) from investments, rather than a going concern with revenue from products or services....

    I’ve fixed this bit; the popularity of this stupidity is maddening.

    Good, intelligent, insightful post. Do we ever, I wonder, reach peak maddening?

  215. @Cagey Beast
    Just now I found another example of a positive trend I've noticed: more and more lefties are getting annoyed by the social media snitches and tattle-tales.

    https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1135030189858205696

    https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1135012565342441472

    The only reason they are upset is because the guy that was doxxed is black. If he had been some deporable white guy from some deplorable state, they would have been totally down with doxxing him, even (especially) if he was a blue collar white.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Michael Tracey and Glenn Greenwald would stand up for the little guy who was doxxed if he were White but I do find it interesting how everyone makes it a point to mention he's Black.
  216. @Jack D
    The only reason they are upset is because the guy that was doxxed is black. If he had been some deporable white guy from some deplorable state, they would have been totally down with doxxing him, even (especially) if he was a blue collar white.

    Michael Tracey and Glenn Greenwald would stand up for the little guy who was doxxed if he were White but I do find it interesting how everyone makes it a point to mention he’s Black.

  217. @Anonymous

    a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.
     
    You've fallen prey to an anti-White rhetorical trick, or you are dishonestly trying to insert a straw man into the discussion.

    A White nationalist simply wants a nation-state that is majority or predominantly White. It doesn't require "removing" nonwhites. Just as one can be a Jewish nationalist without intending to remove all Gentiles from Palestine, and a Japanese nationalist without removing all Koreans from Japan, and a Chinese nationalist without removing all non-Han from China.

    “You’ve fallen prey to an anti-White rhetorical trick, or you are dishonestly trying to insert a straw man into the discussion.”

    Looks like you are making things up as you go along.

    “A White nationalist simply wants a nation-state that is majority or predominantly White. It doesn’t require “removing” nonwhites”.

    They COULD want that, or they COULD want more. There are white nationalists who demand that non-whites be purged. Remember the phrase “that is what separate nations are for”.

    “Just as one can be a Jewish nationalist without intending to remove all Gentiles from Palestine…”

    Have you even talked to a Jewish nationalist lately? They certainly aspire to remove the Palestinians by hook or by crook.

    “and a Japanese nationalist without removing all Koreans from Japan, and a Chinese nationalist without removing all non-Han from China.”

    Except the problem, as we clearly see today, is that the non-whites in the States and Europe constantly make matters worse with their presence. That is why we can’t have nice things.

    See, in order for whites to be dominant, they have to control the institutions, which in the end will mandate force. Are you willing to shed blood for your white ethno-state? Furthermore, how do you plan addressing those whites who oppose its creation?

    You really haven’t thought things through…

  218. @Mr. Anon

    You can always turn the tables. Find which SJW would dare read your heretical scripture of hateful hatefulness.
     
    Indeed, one could employ that old go-to from the liberal play-book - asking how it is that the other person knows some particular hate-fact, as if the mere knowledge itself were some kind of crime. If some liberal happens to know about Steve Sailer or HBD, you could always ask him "How come you know about such things? Do you read unz.com? Why would you do that?"

    There’s some quote I don’t quite remember but it’s something about how leftists turn every question of fact into a question of motivation or intention.

  219. @Anonymous

    Prefer it all you want. It comes down to actually putting it into practice.
     
    If the preference is legitimate--and you imply that it is--what is wrong with putting it into practice?

    “If the preference is legitimate–and you imply that it is–what is wrong with putting it into practice?”

    Go right ahead. You talk a good game, now do it! Are you prepared to go all the way, even risking life and limb?

  220. @Jack D
    I just checked and Edison is still on Google's list of "American inventors". He's the last (white) man standing, although black women are gaining fast - there's Madame Walker, the inventor of black hair straightening - certainly that outranks the telephone or telegraph. When was the last time you used a telegraph?

    And then there is Patricia Bath. In 1986, Bath invented the Laserphaco Probe, improving treatment for cataract patients. She patented the device in 1988, becoming the first African-American female doctor to receive a medical patent, only 350 short years after African Americans arrived on American soil. The Phacoprobe (pronounced fecal probe) surely ranks ahead of the steam boat. When was the last time you rode on a steam boat?

    How long before we find out Edison was sexually harassing his black housekeeper?

    Edison stole the electric light, light bulbs and movie camera from his black gardener.

  221. @TWS
    You are aware the 14th cuts that away? You are aware that if you monitor and edit speech you are no longer a carrier but a publisher thus your protection is null and void. It's almost as if you're trying to get it wrong as long as it supports your view you're a special smart boy.

    “You are aware the 14th cuts that away? You are aware that if you monitor and edit speech you are no longer a carrier but a publisher thus your protection is null and void.”

    What federal court cases have been involved here that cited the 14th Amendment for the situation you give?

  222. @ACommenter
    2015 marked the 800 year anniversary of Magna Carta in England.
    and it went by unnoticed and uncelebrated in the media... if you read what it has to says about international bankers and (((international bankers))) it's not a surprise.

    There are a couple paragraphs about how the evil King John has allowed Jews to collect their high interest loans instead of running the Jews out of town as the nobles often did.

  223. @Neil Templeton

    So, how would you define “white”?
     
    In almost every definition, ravens and crows do not qualify. Limited exception: magpie.

    “In almost every definition, ravens and crows do not qualify. Limited exception: magpie.”

    We’re speaking about humans here, not birds. Perhaps you are confusing this thread with your Looney Tunes marathon. Cue the chicken hawk…

  224. @Steve Sailer
    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.
  225. “…Twitter promised to crack down on hate…”
    Oh yes, hate hate hate hate hate.

    The idea of hate speech is at the core of the left’s attacks on freedom of expression. It still amazes me that such a thing could ever be considered as a viable concept in American jurisprudence. That idea, that concept is so thoroughly anti-American, that anyone who accepts it is not an American and never will be.

    Note clearly that I am not critiquing speech that someone considers to be hateful; instead I am talking about someone believing that such a category actually exists in the first place. The point is that in the real world there is only speech; classifying some part of it as to assumed motives in order to criminalize it, is vile in conception, and constitutes a ghastly error in logic and justice.

    The classification of hate speech is a nightmare of illogical, flawed premises. It deliberately blurs the line between acts and thoughts. It treats words as deeds, as if they were a voodoo spell that magically brings harm down on some amorphous third party. It makes telepathic assumptions about emotions and motivations, using only a gross binary dialectic without regard for a spectrum of feelings such as disgust or contempt. And the underlying premise that hatred is always evil and therefore to be eradicated is itself a dangerous lie. In doing all this it completely undermines presumption of innocence.

    From its inception there has been only selective enforcement, which proves beyond doubt the impossibility of setting objective standards to determine its presence in any given situation. Each and every law that implements it has no explicit definition for what it is and what it is not. It becomes simply a handy excuse to wage lawfare and permit violent ‘preemptive defense’ by thugs such as antifa.

    How did such a thing ever get introduced into Western society? How could it be accepted without question by free Americans? Why does nobody ever talk about it? Why is nobody analyzing its blatant inconsistencies, and railing against it each time the leftist legal system uses it to subdue their enemies? How could Americans not have realized its dangers from the outset, and not have been trying to overturn it ever since?

    It’s long past time that someone with enough legal resources leads the fight against the whole concept of hate speech, to argue against it in law journals and in the courts, and to ultimately bring it before the Supreme Court until it is excised like a cancer from the body of law. Unless that happens, anyone to the right of Mao will be attacked, harassed, and have their lives ruined, while all of society lives in fear about the crack down on any and every thing that comes out of our mouths.

    • Replies: @Moses

    How did such a thing ever get introduced into Western society?
     
    Yeah, it's a real puzzler. We may never know what group was behind this.
  226. @Anonymous
    How does she define the term at issue? Does she object to wanting Japan to remain majority Japanese? To China remaining majority Han? To Israel remaining majority Jewish? If not, why does she disavow a desire for the countries of the West to remain majority White? Why does she discriminate against Whites?

    Whoa there, I am WN myself (or a fellow-traveller at very least); you don’t need to tell me! But the fact remains that Southern wants White societies to retain a white majority but does not not oppose limited nonwhite immigration. She explicitly rejects the WN label.

  227. @Cagey Beast
    Just now I found another example of a positive trend I've noticed: more and more lefties are getting annoyed by the social media snitches and tattle-tales.

    https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1135030189858205696

    https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1135012565342441472

    Glenn Greenwald is a lefty but an honest one. He probably only get away with his CrimeSpeak because he’s gay. Tucker has him on from time to time.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Yes Greenwald being both gay and Jewish is the modern equivalent of coming from the minor nobility. At least he uses his Pokemon points for good.
  228. @Jim Don Bob
    Glenn Greenwald is a lefty but an honest one. He probably only get away with his CrimeSpeak because he's gay. Tucker has him on from time to time.

    Yes Greenwald being both gay and Jewish is the modern equivalent of coming from the minor nobility. At least he uses his Pokemon points for good.

  229. @Mr. Anon

    I obviously have a lot of secret writings that I’ve never published.
     
    And they have come to the attention of the Central Scrutinizer - the authority charged with enforcing those laws that have not yet been enacted.

    “This is the CENTRAL SCRUTINIZER…it is my responsibility to enforce all the laws that haven’t been passed yet. It is also my responsibility to alert each and every one of you to the potential consequences of various ordinary everyday activities you might be performing which could eventually lead to *The Death Penalty* (or affect your parents’ credit rating).”

  230. @Corvinus
    "Define “White Nationalist”."

    A person who is white who seeks, at worst, a white dominated ethno-state which controls the non-white opposition, or, at best, a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    So, how would you define "white"?

    that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.

    San Francisco! Washington, DC!

    S.F. Could Be Much Whiter in 25 Years, While the Rest of Region Gets More Diverse

    (There is far less segregation aimed at blacks in San Francisco now– because there are far fewer blacks: Segregation and the Civil Rights Movement in San Francisco)


  231. @Corvinus
    "No, it isn’t. A white nationalist doesn’t want a white majority. He wants a white entirety."

    According to Who/Whom?

    "The Confederates weren’t white nationalists, but multiculturalist diversitarians."

    Does that term even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    You have a lot of work ahead of you...

    You have a lot of work ahead of you…

    Hardly. The CSA was fighting for a much more racially diverse union than the one they were in. I rest my case:

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Hardly. The CSA was fighting for a much more racially diverse union than the one they were in. I rest my case:"

    LOL. The South already was diverse in 1790 AND in 1860--whites and blacks. Perhaps you meant to say "ethnically diverse".

    Major fail on your part. Redeem yourself. Does that term (multiculturalist diversitarians) even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    Again, you have a lot of work ahead of you.
  232. @Anonymous
    He is pretty confused in this thread.

    He is pretty confused in this thread.

    Who, me? Compare the preferred direction of African movement across the sea of the Republicans and of the Confederates, and tell me which side was “celebrating diversity”.

    • Replies: @anon
    Compare the nonwhite share of the Southern States in 1860 to the projected nonwhite share of the USA in 2060, and tell us which side is celebrating "diversity".
  233. @Steve Sailer
    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.

    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.

    If there is dirt on John Podhoretz, it could probably get through the Hays Code, and be broadcast in prime time.

  234. @Reg Cæsar

    He is pretty confused in this thread.
     
    Who, me? Compare the preferred direction of African movement across the sea of the Republicans and of the Confederates, and tell me which side was "celebrating diversity".

    Compare the nonwhite share of the Southern States in 1860 to the projected nonwhite share of the USA in 2060, and tell us which side is celebrating “diversity”.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Compare the nonwhite share of the Southern States in 1860 to the projected nonwhite share of the USA in 2060, and tell us which side is celebrating “diversity”.
     
    Whites were a minority in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi by 1820.

    Both then and now, it was whites with too much betraying whites with too little.
  235. @Reg Cæsar

    You have a lot of work ahead of you…
     
    Hardly. The CSA was fighting for a much more racially diverse union than the one they were in. I rest my case:

    https://www-tc.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/wp-content/themes/many-rivers-to-cross/views/timeline/images/chapter2/manyrivers.cp2.5.bg.png

    “Hardly. The CSA was fighting for a much more racially diverse union than the one they were in. I rest my case:”

    LOL. The South already was diverse in 1790 AND in 1860–whites and blacks. Perhaps you meant to say “ethnically diverse”.

    Major fail on your part. Redeem yourself. Does that term (multiculturalist diversitarians) even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    Again, you have a lot of work ahead of you.

    • Replies: @Neil Templeton
    My God, you are long winded.
  236. @Corvinus
    "The premise is, some cultures are better than others."

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?

    “The premise is, some cultures are better than others.”

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?

    Here’s a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.

    • Agree: ben tillman
    • Replies: @TWS
    Voting with your feet, strong indication of perceived superiority.
    , @dfordoom

    Here’s a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.
     
    But people mostly don't risk their lives to emigrate for cultural reasons. Their motivation is money. People don't want to go to western countries because they're culturally superior. They want to go to the West because it's richer.
    , @Corvinus
    "Here’s a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to."

    If we employ your metric, that would mean tens of millions of Europeans would fit this description. The fact of the matter is that people leave a society, not their culture, because of political persecution and/financial instability.

    Try again.
  237. • Replies: @Anonymous
    National tourism.
    , @Corvinus
    So she is going back to school and pursue a career rather than get married and have a a brood of white babies. Where is the outrage by the Alt Right for feminist decision-making?
  238. @Lowe
    Orwell's vision of a possible dystopian future, a boot stamping on a face, presumably European, will not come to pass. The only people interested and capable of implementing this totalitarian "world of trampling and being trampled upon" are Europeans, who are vanishing demographically.

    Everyone else is either uninterested (East Asians) or inadequate to the task (Middle Easterners, Africans). What the future actually looks like is fairly libertarian, filled with dark-hued human bodies, an over-abundance of low quality labor, and such a scarcity of competence and idealogical passion that a 1984-style Inner Party is out of the question.

    You miss the point.

    Europeans have become everyone’s favorite kicking bag. It will get worse before it gets better.

    We’re all Jews now.

  239. @Steve Sailer
    Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube, the ex-Mossad Squad, to get him dirt on John Podhoretz.

    Pod the lesser?

  240. @scrivener3

    “The premise is, some cultures are better than others.”

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?
     
    Here's a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.

    Voting with your feet, strong indication of perceived superiority.

  241. @Monotonous Languor
    “...Twitter promised to crack down on hate...”
    Oh yes, hate hate hate hate hate.

    The idea of hate speech is at the core of the left's attacks on freedom of expression. It still amazes me that such a thing could ever be considered as a viable concept in American jurisprudence. That idea, that concept is so thoroughly anti-American, that anyone who accepts it is not an American and never will be.

    Note clearly that I am not critiquing speech that someone considers to be hateful; instead I am talking about someone believing that such a category actually exists in the first place. The point is that in the real world there is only speech; classifying some part of it as to assumed motives in order to criminalize it, is vile in conception, and constitutes a ghastly error in logic and justice.

    The classification of hate speech is a nightmare of illogical, flawed premises. It deliberately blurs the line between acts and thoughts. It treats words as deeds, as if they were a voodoo spell that magically brings harm down on some amorphous third party. It makes telepathic assumptions about emotions and motivations, using only a gross binary dialectic without regard for a spectrum of feelings such as disgust or contempt. And the underlying premise that hatred is always evil and therefore to be eradicated is itself a dangerous lie. In doing all this it completely undermines presumption of innocence.

    From its inception there has been only selective enforcement, which proves beyond doubt the impossibility of setting objective standards to determine its presence in any given situation. Each and every law that implements it has no explicit definition for what it is and what it is not. It becomes simply a handy excuse to wage lawfare and permit violent 'preemptive defense' by thugs such as antifa.

    How did such a thing ever get introduced into Western society? How could it be accepted without question by free Americans? Why does nobody ever talk about it? Why is nobody analyzing its blatant inconsistencies, and railing against it each time the leftist legal system uses it to subdue their enemies? How could Americans not have realized its dangers from the outset, and not have been trying to overturn it ever since?

    It's long past time that someone with enough legal resources leads the fight against the whole concept of hate speech, to argue against it in law journals and in the courts, and to ultimately bring it before the Supreme Court until it is excised like a cancer from the body of law. Unless that happens, anyone to the right of Mao will be attacked, harassed, and have their lives ruined, while all of society lives in fear about the crack down on any and every thing that comes out of our mouths.

    How did such a thing ever get introduced into Western society?

    Yeah, it’s a real puzzler. We may never know what group was behind this.

  242. @scrivener3

    “The premise is, some cultures are better than others.”

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?
     
    Here's a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.

    Here’s a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.

    But people mostly don’t risk their lives to emigrate for cultural reasons. Their motivation is money. People don’t want to go to western countries because they’re culturally superior. They want to go to the West because it’s richer.

  243. @Corvinus
    "Hardly. The CSA was fighting for a much more racially diverse union than the one they were in. I rest my case:"

    LOL. The South already was diverse in 1790 AND in 1860--whites and blacks. Perhaps you meant to say "ethnically diverse".

    Major fail on your part. Redeem yourself. Does that term (multiculturalist diversitarians) even exist? What does it mean? Please define specifically. What metrics are involved? How would Confederate writings of the time period support that definition and prove that they would agree with that criteria?

    Again, you have a lot of work ahead of you.

    My God, you are long winded.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    My God, you are long winded.
     
    SPLC must pay by the word.
  244. @istevefan
    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don't know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    You’re repeating a Big Lie.

    The name of the committee was House Committee on Un-American Activities. The FAKE denomination you repeat was fabricated to imply that the Committee was engaging in un-American activities itself.

    • Replies: @JudgeSmails


    You’re repeating a Big Lie.

    The name of the committee was House Committee on Un-American Activities. The FAKE denomination you repeat was fabricated to imply that the Committee was engaging in un-American activities itself.
     

    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.
     

    "House Committee", "Un-American Activities Committee", "Senator".

    I can't speak for istevefan, but I detect a healthy dose of sarcasm in his comment.

  245. Anonymous[327] • Disclaimer says:
    @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/Lauren_Southern/status/1135350352637599744

    National tourism.

  246. @istevefan
    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    I don't know why this was. I suppose it was because whenever this topic was discussed on TV, they showed scared Hollywood actors testifying in front of said committee, and the presenter complained about something called McCarthyism.

    But from what you wrote it appears Hollywood studios took it upon themselves to do the blacklisting. Was this done because they were on board with routing out commies, or was it done to get the government off their backs?

    the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    Since it was a House committee it could hardly have been run by a senator.

  247. @anon
    Compare the nonwhite share of the Southern States in 1860 to the projected nonwhite share of the USA in 2060, and tell us which side is celebrating "diversity".

    Compare the nonwhite share of the Southern States in 1860 to the projected nonwhite share of the USA in 2060, and tell us which side is celebrating “diversity”.

    Whites were a minority in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi by 1820.

    Both then and now, it was whites with too much betraying whites with too little.

    • Replies: @anon

    Whites were a minority in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi by 1820.
     
    Oh really? Were they a minority of citizens?

    And were they a smaller minority than Whites now are in New York City? A smaller minority than Whites will be nationwide in 2060?

  248. @Reg Cæsar

    Compare the nonwhite share of the Southern States in 1860 to the projected nonwhite share of the USA in 2060, and tell us which side is celebrating “diversity”.
     
    Whites were a minority in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi by 1820.

    Both then and now, it was whites with too much betraying whites with too little.

    Whites were a minority in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi by 1820.

    Oh really? Were they a minority of citizens?

    And were they a smaller minority than Whites now are in New York City? A smaller minority than Whites will be nationwide in 2060?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Why are you so touchy? Did I hit a nerve?

    Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it.

    During the Civil War the Confederate President saw nothing of his Brierfield servants. When summoned to Montgomery to lead the Confederates he went to Brierfield, assembled the negroes and made a farewell talk... Before leaving Brierfield he gave to the negroes all the supplies that he could command. To "Uncle Bob," who was rheumatic, he gave so many blankets and supplies that when the Federals came they confiscated them because they said that Davis could never have given him so much, that he must have stolen them or he must be trying to save them for his master. Mr. Davis said, "Nothing ever done to me made me so indignant as the treatment of this old colored man."

    Jefferson Davis, the Negroes and the Negro Problem, The Sewanee Review, Oct. 1908

     

  249. @anon

    Whites were a minority in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi by 1820.
     
    Oh really? Were they a minority of citizens?

    And were they a smaller minority than Whites now are in New York City? A smaller minority than Whites will be nationwide in 2060?

    Why are you so touchy? Did I hit a nerve?

    Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it.

    During the Civil War the Confederate President saw nothing of his Brierfield servants. When summoned to Montgomery to lead the Confederates he went to Brierfield, assembled the negroes and made a farewell talk… Before leaving Brierfield he gave to the negroes all the supplies that he could command. To “Uncle Bob,” who was rheumatic, he gave so many blankets and supplies that when the Federals came they confiscated them because they said that Davis could never have given him so much, that he must have stolen them or he must be trying to save them for his master. Mr. Davis said, “Nothing ever done to me made me so indignant as the treatment of this old colored man.”

    Jefferson Davis, the Negroes and the Negro Problem, The Sewanee Review, Oct. 1908

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it."

    In those rare instances where their master did not routinely crack the whip. Of course, you do realize you are linking to a source that will paint a positive picture of the slave-master relationship. Otherwise, as a general rule, slaves were not particularly fond of plantation owners and plantation work.

    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

  250. @bored identity
    Speak for yourself.


    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.

    That's mostly because bored identity's white liver and blackened heart possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.

    That’s truly sad!

  251. @bored identity
    Speak for yourself.


    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.

    That's mostly because bored identity's white liver and blackened heart possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    Oh, that’s really nothing;

    You should see Tiny Duck’s subscription roster.

  252. @bored identity
    Speak for yourself.


    99.9 % of valuable information for daily survival bored identity receives through his monthly subscription to Huffington Post Post and Commentary.

    That's mostly because bored identity's white liver and blackened heart possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups and need stricter moral guidance from society.

    Oh, that’s really nothing;

    You should see Tiny Duck’s subscription roster.

  253. @scrivener3

    “The premise is, some cultures are better than others.”

    How does one prove that premise? What are your criteria?
     
    Here's a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.

    “Here’s a try, cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to emigrate from are inferior to cultures that [lots of] people are willing to risk their lives to immigrate to.”

    If we employ your metric, that would mean tens of millions of Europeans would fit this description. The fact of the matter is that people leave a society, not their culture, because of political persecution and/financial instability.

    Try again.

  254. @Reg Cæsar
    Why are you so touchy? Did I hit a nerve?

    Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it.

    During the Civil War the Confederate President saw nothing of his Brierfield servants. When summoned to Montgomery to lead the Confederates he went to Brierfield, assembled the negroes and made a farewell talk... Before leaving Brierfield he gave to the negroes all the supplies that he could command. To "Uncle Bob," who was rheumatic, he gave so many blankets and supplies that when the Federals came they confiscated them because they said that Davis could never have given him so much, that he must have stolen them or he must be trying to save them for his master. Mr. Davis said, "Nothing ever done to me made me so indignant as the treatment of this old colored man."

    Jefferson Davis, the Negroes and the Negro Problem, The Sewanee Review, Oct. 1908

     

    “Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it.”

    In those rare instances where their master did not routinely crack the whip. Of course, you do realize you are linking to a source that will paint a positive picture of the slave-master relationship. Otherwise, as a general rule, slaves were not particularly fond of plantation owners and plantation work.

    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

    • Replies: @anon
    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

    Africans probably had better lives as slaves in the United States than they would have had had they remained in Africa. Their descendants certainly have.

    , @JudgeSmails

    The South should have planted their own damn cotton
     
    .

    Agreed. Planted, cultivated, weeded, fertilized, AND picked their own damn cotton.

    "If we knew then..."
  255. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/Lauren_Southern/status/1135350352637599744

    So she is going back to school and pursue a career rather than get married and have a a brood of white babies. Where is the outrage by the Alt Right for feminist decision-making?

  256. @Anonymous

    a white majority ethno-state that successfully initiated policies that removed, by peaceful means or by force, non-whites.
     
    You've fallen prey to an anti-White rhetorical trick, or you are dishonestly trying to insert a straw man into the discussion.

    A White nationalist simply wants a nation-state that is majority or predominantly White. It doesn't require "removing" nonwhites. Just as one can be a Jewish nationalist without intending to remove all Gentiles from Palestine, and a Japanese nationalist without removing all Koreans from Japan, and a Chinese nationalist without removing all non-Han from China.

    You are making the mistake of assuming that “Corvinus” is a rational actor and/or acting in good faith. He isn’t and he isn’t. He is a stupid brain-washed dolt. You may as well carry on a discussion with a parrot.

    • Agree: William Badwhite
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You are making the mistake of assuming that “Corvinus” is a rational actor and/or acting in good faith. He isn’t and he isn’t. He is a stupid brain-washed dolt. You may as well carry on a discussion with a parrot."

    You constantly fall prey to your own confirmation biases. You really do not yourself any favors here.
  257. Whoah, I just read where Trump left thousands of Puerto Ricans to DIE!
    Harsh. Orange Man bad!

  258. @tsotha
    Wow, Steve, you sound like a terrible person. Routinely demeaning people of color? Do you have, like, a calendar app that beeps at you when it's demeaning time?

    One would think that Specially demeaning people of color merits a lower level of hell than merely Routinely demeaning them. Are they implying Steve is too lazy to put the effort into finding new ways to demean?

  259. @Mr. Anon
    You are making the mistake of assuming that "Corvinus" is a rational actor and/or acting in good faith. He isn't and he isn't. He is a stupid brain-washed dolt. You may as well carry on a discussion with a parrot.

    “You are making the mistake of assuming that “Corvinus” is a rational actor and/or acting in good faith. He isn’t and he isn’t. He is a stupid brain-washed dolt. You may as well carry on a discussion with a parrot.”

    You constantly fall prey to your own confirmation biases. You really do not yourself any favors here.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Corvinus want a cracker?
  260. @Corvinus
    "Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it."

    In those rare instances where their master did not routinely crack the whip. Of course, you do realize you are linking to a source that will paint a positive picture of the slave-master relationship. Otherwise, as a general rule, slaves were not particularly fond of plantation owners and plantation work.

    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

    Africans probably had better lives as slaves in the United States than they would have had had they remained in Africa. Their descendants certainly have.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Africans probably had better lives as slaves in the United States than they would have had had they remained in Africa. Their descendants certainly have."

    Actually, it's the opposite.

    "The slaves in Africa, I suppose, are nearly in the proportion of three to one to the freemen. They claim no reward for their services except food and clothing, and are treated with kindness or severity, according to the good or bad disposition of their masters. Custom, however, has established certain rules with regard to the treatment of slaves, which it is thought dishonourable to violate. Thus the domestic slaves, or such as are born in a man’s own house, are treated with more lenity than those which are purchased with money. ... But these restrictions on the power of the master extend not to the care of prisoners taken in war, nor to that of slaves purchased with money. All these unfortunate beings are considered as strangers and foreigners, who have no right to the protection of the law, and may be treated with severity, or sold to a stranger, according to the pleasure of their owners."

    Travels in the Interior of Africa, Mungo Park, Travels in the Interior of Africa v. II, Chapter XXII – War and Slavery

    Many slave relationships in Africa revolved around domestic slavery, where slaves would work primarily in the house of the master but retain some freedoms. Domestic slaves could be considered part of the master's household and would not be sold to others without extreme cause. The slaves could own the profits from their labour (whether in land or in products), and could marry and pass the land on to their children in many cases.
  261. @anon
    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

    Africans probably had better lives as slaves in the United States than they would have had had they remained in Africa. Their descendants certainly have.

    “Africans probably had better lives as slaves in the United States than they would have had had they remained in Africa. Their descendants certainly have.”

    Actually, it’s the opposite.

    “The slaves in Africa, I suppose, are nearly in the proportion of three to one to the freemen. They claim no reward for their services except food and clothing, and are treated with kindness or severity, according to the good or bad disposition of their masters. Custom, however, has established certain rules with regard to the treatment of slaves, which it is thought dishonourable to violate. Thus the domestic slaves, or such as are born in a man’s own house, are treated with more lenity than those which are purchased with money. … But these restrictions on the power of the master extend not to the care of prisoners taken in war, nor to that of slaves purchased with money. All these unfortunate beings are considered as strangers and foreigners, who have no right to the protection of the law, and may be treated with severity, or sold to a stranger, according to the pleasure of their owners.”

    Travels in the Interior of Africa, Mungo Park, Travels in the Interior of Africa v. II, Chapter XXII – War and Slavery

    Many slave relationships in Africa revolved around domestic slavery, where slaves would work primarily in the house of the master but retain some freedoms. Domestic slaves could be considered part of the master’s household and would not be sold to others without extreme cause. The slaves could own the profits from their labour (whether in land or in products), and could marry and pass the land on to their children in many cases.

  262. @ben tillman

    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.
     
    You're repeating a Big Lie.

    The name of the committee was House Committee on Un-American Activities. The FAKE denomination you repeat was fabricated to imply that the Committee was engaging in un-American activities itself.

    You’re repeating a Big Lie.

    The name of the committee was House Committee on Un-American Activities. The FAKE denomination you repeat was fabricated to imply that the Committee was engaging in un-American activities itself.

    I forgot about that. As a kid growing up I was always under the impression that the Hollywood blacklist was the result of the the House Un-American Activities Committee, which we all know was run by Senator McCarthy.

    “House Committee”, “Un-American Activities Committee”, “Senator”.

    I can’t speak for istevefan, but I detect a healthy dose of sarcasm in his comment.

  263. @Corvinus
    "Planters loved their Africans. Admit it, and live with it."

    In those rare instances where their master did not routinely crack the whip. Of course, you do realize you are linking to a source that will paint a positive picture of the slave-master relationship. Otherwise, as a general rule, slaves were not particularly fond of plantation owners and plantation work.

    Regardless, the imposition of slavery by Europeans onto a free people was a moral abomination. The South should have planted their own damn cotton.

    The South should have planted their own damn cotton

    .

    Agreed. Planted, cultivated, weeded, fertilized, AND picked their own damn cotton.

    “If we knew then…”

  264. @Neil Templeton
    My God, you are long winded.

    My God, you are long winded.

    SPLC must pay by the word.

  265. “SPLC must pay by the word.”

    Nay, by a pound of flesh. You rarely get things right. Do you enjoy being your Washington General to my Harlem Globetrotter?

  266. Why do people like / read Sailer? It’s a genuine question.

    I read because it’s got some interesting stuff in it (apart from movie reviews and the like, and I’m not into the whole sports scene so that stuff I skip), which typically wouldn’t be explored elsewhere.

    But I see there’s a lot of blind spots: a lot of conformation bias, selection bias, cherry-picking of datapoints, strawman arguments, false analogies, false (or at least flimsy) inferences extrapolated from selective data.

    Unfortunately sailer often Copy-pastes the parts of articles that are easy to poke holes in and be snarky about – and then reinforces his core beliefs at the end. Even if the very same article admitted to an alternative explanation or offered a more nuanced explanation.

    With non-NYT / non-liberal articles, specifically the ones on genetics and IQ and race, he often forces things into a false dichotomy just to make a point. It’s often worthwhile to explore the grey… but of course, no where near as fun or entertaining to read when we have a strong point of view and hone in to the bits that fit, and throw out the inconvenient aspects. To take a far more benign view of the situation, perhaps Sailer truly attempts to make a very robust, well researched argument.. but he, as I, as any human, will have certain core beliefs and it’s nefariously easy to get drawn to the arguments that reinforce our core beliefs. Even if there is an objective truth on the other side, as humans we psychologically reject what is uncomfortable to us and throws our internal beliefs into disarray. Not a very fun blog to read then, with all the mess. Far better to stand by a certain view point and try to make it as well researched as possible and fitting with one’s narrative and position.

    I guess that’s what bloggers do, conservative or liberal, they pick a narrative and pick aspects that support their central hypothesis, and minimize or neglect the aspects that don’t – because this is what makes for good reading. Nuance, and objective truth (if such things exist), and noisy data, and unknowns arent quite as fun as making a bold and and emphatic inference, even if the larger picture is much noisier and inconveniently messy.

    Regardless of my myriad of issues with a lot of Sailer’s articles, it’s still interesting to read, blind-spots and all. If nothing else, it points to interesting topics that I can then independently research and formulate an opinion on.

    But that’s me – and I suspect I am not the norm compared to other readers and commenters here. I ask with genuine curiosity: what draws you here?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If nothing else, it points to interesting topics that I can then independently research and formulate an opinion on.

    That's kind of the point, isn't it? I generate a lot of ideas quickly because, as I've demonstrated over the decades, I have unusual pattern recognition skills. That doesn't mean all my quick ideas are right, but clearly I have a track record superior to most pundits.

    I sometimes devote a huge amount of effort to quantitative research and have come up with important findings that have wowed heavyweight social scientists like Andrew Gelman. But I toss out ideas that I will never get around to following up on in hopes that somebody else will check them out. I'm happy when somebody follows them up, whether I get mentioned or not.

  267. @ConfirmationBias
    Why do people like / read Sailer? It’s a genuine question.

    I read because it’s got some interesting stuff in it (apart from movie reviews and the like, and I’m not into the whole sports scene so that stuff I skip), which typically wouldn’t be explored elsewhere.

    But I see there’s a lot of blind spots: a lot of conformation bias, selection bias, cherry-picking of datapoints, strawman arguments, false analogies, false (or at least flimsy) inferences extrapolated from selective data.

    Unfortunately sailer often Copy-pastes the parts of articles that are easy to poke holes in and be snarky about - and then reinforces his core beliefs at the end. Even if the very same article admitted to an alternative explanation or offered a more nuanced explanation.

    With non-NYT / non-liberal articles, specifically the ones on genetics and IQ and race, he often forces things into a false dichotomy just to make a point. It’s often worthwhile to explore the grey... but of course, no where near as fun or entertaining to read when we have a strong point of view and hone in to the bits that fit, and throw out the inconvenient aspects. To take a far more benign view of the situation, perhaps Sailer truly attempts to make a very robust, well researched argument.. but he, as I, as any human, will have certain core beliefs and it’s nefariously easy to get drawn to the arguments that reinforce our core beliefs. Even if there is an objective truth on the other side, as humans we psychologically reject what is uncomfortable to us and throws our internal beliefs into disarray. Not a very fun blog to read then, with all the mess. Far better to stand by a certain view point and try to make it as well researched as possible and fitting with one’s narrative and position.

    I guess that’s what bloggers do, conservative or liberal, they pick a narrative and pick aspects that support their central hypothesis, and minimize or neglect the aspects that don’t - because this is what makes for good reading. Nuance, and objective truth (if such things exist), and noisy data, and unknowns arent quite as fun as making a bold and and emphatic inference, even if the larger picture is much noisier and inconveniently messy.

    Regardless of my myriad of issues with a lot of Sailer’s articles, it’s still interesting to read, blind-spots and all. If nothing else, it points to interesting topics that I can then independently research and formulate an opinion on.

    But that’s me - and I suspect I am not the norm compared to other readers and commenters here. I ask with genuine curiosity: what draws you here?

    If nothing else, it points to interesting topics that I can then independently research and formulate an opinion on.

    That’s kind of the point, isn’t it? I generate a lot of ideas quickly because, as I’ve demonstrated over the decades, I have unusual pattern recognition skills. That doesn’t mean all my quick ideas are right, but clearly I have a track record superior to most pundits.

    I sometimes devote a huge amount of effort to quantitative research and have come up with important findings that have wowed heavyweight social scientists like Andrew Gelman. But I toss out ideas that I will never get around to following up on in hopes that somebody else will check them out. I’m happy when somebody follows them up, whether I get mentioned or not.

    • Replies: @ConfirmationBias
    :)

    Thank you for that response. Yes, I greatly enjoy the well-researched articles, but I see how sometimes we want to throw things up quickly even if they’re nascent ideas; it benefits from dialogue. What happens when an idea then gets scientifically refuted? The robustness and completeness of the counter-argument is another point altogether. Do you revisit the original hypothesis? I’d be curious to see the evolution of thought on one topic.

  268. Steve, that’s pretty much what I’ve thought you’ve been doing here.

    Speaking for myself, I made fragmentary observations and arguments as a citizen-activist that I knew were fragmentary at the time I was making them, because I was under pressure to say something fast to trash-talkers. Error preferable to delay. Yeah, I was hoping to sway the indifferent and mildly sympathetic but passive that I was confident in my opinions by demonstrating a speedy response to people who were whomping me.

  269. @Steve Sailer
    If nothing else, it points to interesting topics that I can then independently research and formulate an opinion on.

    That's kind of the point, isn't it? I generate a lot of ideas quickly because, as I've demonstrated over the decades, I have unusual pattern recognition skills. That doesn't mean all my quick ideas are right, but clearly I have a track record superior to most pundits.

    I sometimes devote a huge amount of effort to quantitative research and have come up with important findings that have wowed heavyweight social scientists like Andrew Gelman. But I toss out ideas that I will never get around to following up on in hopes that somebody else will check them out. I'm happy when somebody follows them up, whether I get mentioned or not.

    🙂

    Thank you for that response. Yes, I greatly enjoy the well-researched articles, but I see how sometimes we want to throw things up quickly even if they’re nascent ideas; it benefits from dialogue. What happens when an idea then gets scientifically refuted? The robustness and completeness of the counter-argument is another point altogether. Do you revisit the original hypothesis? I’d be curious to see the evolution of thought on one topic.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Generally speaking, most decent ideas go through thesis -> antithesis -> synthesis process. I give an example of what I think might be a general pattern, somebody points out a counterexample, then somebody comes up with a distinction in which seemingly contradictory examples can both be true: a synthesis.

    Granted, that's probably not how everybody else uses these terms, but they work for me.

  270. @ConfirmationBias
    :)

    Thank you for that response. Yes, I greatly enjoy the well-researched articles, but I see how sometimes we want to throw things up quickly even if they’re nascent ideas; it benefits from dialogue. What happens when an idea then gets scientifically refuted? The robustness and completeness of the counter-argument is another point altogether. Do you revisit the original hypothesis? I’d be curious to see the evolution of thought on one topic.

    Generally speaking, most decent ideas go through thesis -> antithesis -> synthesis process. I give an example of what I think might be a general pattern, somebody points out a counterexample, then somebody comes up with a distinction in which seemingly contradictory examples can both be true: a synthesis.

    Granted, that’s probably not how everybody else uses these terms, but they work for me.

  271. @Corvinus
    "You are making the mistake of assuming that “Corvinus” is a rational actor and/or acting in good faith. He isn’t and he isn’t. He is a stupid brain-washed dolt. You may as well carry on a discussion with a parrot."

    You constantly fall prey to your own confirmation biases. You really do not yourself any favors here.

    Corvinus want a cracker?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?