The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Eight Years Hate
🔊 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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Nodwink on how the appearance of divided government is what the Uniparty prefers on account of it adding an extra layer of discord to keep the public at each other’s throats instead of the Uniparty’s:

The ideal outcome for the current Ruling Class (including the Oligarchy) is for a divided government. I’d say their favoured situation would be for Gropey to scrape over the line, and for the GOP to hold the Senate at least, or even both chambers. This would be handy for Biden, who could tell Bernie to “Take a hike, Mac!” with his unrealistic demands.

Interesting, though I suspect the perceived optimal arrangement to be the inverse–Democrats take the Senate, extend their advantage in the House, and Trump squeaks by in a narrow Electoral College victory while losing the popular vote by an even wider margin than in 2016. They get their Goldstein, hated and completely hamstrung.

Is Saudi Arabia, rich from oil in a kingdom maintained by foreign laborers, really as affluent as the Netherlands? Their purchasing power parities are at, well, parity. How is that relationship going to look in fifty years, though? Nebulafox on a similar dynamic in antebellum America:

Would the US have really been worse off and poorer if slavery ended around 1800 and the South hadn’t proceeded to drag the nation down? In the context of the Industrial Revolution, which America took advantage of as well as any other nation, I doubt that: steel and coal and railroads were the future. At a time when entrepreneurs were doing stuff like building railroads up North, men on the make in the South who otherwise might have been doing the same were still heading into agriculture, because that remained the route to upward mobility. Those railroads played a critical part in how the Civil War went. An agrarian slave dominated economy was simply not able to compete with modernity. You don’t need to use America as an example. Just look at serf-holding Russia’s failed attempts to keep pace with Western Europe.

Lockean Proviso on the same theme:

The north was industrializing, improving infrastructure, and attracting productive, intelligent immigrants from Europe, a trend that the south thought their cotton bubble wealth could overcome. They were, of course, very wrong. Slavery profits blinded the south to the need to diversify and innovate. It was a commodity boom, but they didn’t feel the pressure to compete for the long run.

Craig Nelsen presents a handy graphic tracing the rates of deaths of despair for young and middle-aged American men over the last couple of decades:

Men doing what men of a defeated people do.

Here is a chart I made from the mortality data at the CDC combining suicide and drug and alcohol deaths for US males, ages 15-54, by race:

The white and black rates have diverged significantly over that time. While black rates have happily gone down, white rates have steadily risen and are now about on par with the high rates suffered by American Indians.

 
• Category: Culture/Society • Tags: COTW 
Hide 130 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Oddly, in the minds of people like me who look for political connections, the black suicide rate has been declining all century, long before anyone heard of Barack Obama. When Obama becomes a national figure, black suicide improvement stopped and even ticked up slightly in the Late Obama Age Collapse.

    Probably the reason isn’t political so much as economic: the Great Recession. Everyone’s suicide rates were suffering a little updraft.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    , @Hypnotoad666
  2. dfordoom says: • Website

    though I suspect the perceived optimal arrangement to be the inverse–Democrats take the Senate, extend their advantage in the House, and Trump squeaks by in a narrow Electoral College victory while losing the popular vote by an even wider margin than in 2016. They get their Goldstein, hated and completely hamstrung.

    Yep. That’s the dream result for the Social Justice Left. That will give them four years of non-stop Cultural Revolution on a scale and intensity level dwarfing anything we’ve seen so far. They will be able to complete the Cultural Revolution and move on to the Great Purge stage. Not just a purge of conservatives but a full-on purge of old school liberals. I predict that old school feminists will be the first to be purged.

    And four years of Trump failures (pretty much inevitable since even if he were competent he could achieve nothing in such circumstances) which will discredit the GOP for years to come. And presumably they will be able to block him from stacking the Supreme Court with conservatives.

    It’s an ideal result not just for the Cultural Revolutionaries but for the Democrats. Trump will be saddled with a ruined economy and COVID out of control and the Democrats will be able to saddle him with all the blame. They will then be in a position to win the White House in a landslide in 2024, against any candidate the GOP puts up. After that they should be able to remain in control of the White House for at least three or four terms without the slightest difficulty.

    A Biden victory would cause all sorts of problems. The Social Justice Left would have to postpone the Cultural Revolution. If they don’t, Biden will have to act to crush it or at least dampen it down significantly. And if Biden wins the Democrats will have to figure out how to revive the economy and solve the COVID problem and they’re problems that are probably unsolvable in the short term.

  3. @Almost Missouri

    The suicide rate in Southern Europe, where the economic crsis has hit harder than in the United States for years, has only marginally increased among middle aged men, and is actually decreasing in young men and women. That’s despite corona-tier unemployment for about a decade now. That contradicts the idea that suicide is related to economics.

    Likewise, the male suicide rate in Sweden has been decreasing for the last 5 years, and is lower than it was 10 years ago:

    https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/SWE/sweden/suicide-rate

    The suicide rate today is also significantly lower than it was in the 1960s in Sweden, when it was over 20 per 100,000:

    Instead, neither your argument nor Audacious Epigone’s coveted graph-and-“defeated people” comment fetish, which he posts obsessively, can explain the modest rise in suicide rates among white Americans. White people aren’t defeated.

    Instead, the strongest predictive correlate of rising suicides is the skyrocketing rate of gun ownership by paranoid and irrational individuals:

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2007658

    In March 2020, as the coronavirus pandemic spread throughout the United States, Americans bought nearly 2 million guns — the second highest monthly total in the decades since such records have been kept. Previous spikes in U.S. firearm sales have followed widely publicized mass shootings and the attendant national calls for regulations regarding the prevention of gun violence. (January 2013, the month after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, holds the record for the highest number.)1 That so many Americans started or added to their personal arsenal when faced with deeply uncertain times suggests the extent to which many consider a firearm to be a form of personal protective equipment during a national emergency.

    Gun violence in America is often mired in intense political or legal debate, but the special article in this issue of the Journal by Studdert and colleagues,2 which examines the relationship between handgun ownership and suicide in California, serves as yet another reminder that gun violence is unequivocally a public health issue. Two particularly important findings emerge from this rigorously conducted study: first, new handgun ownership is strongly associated with suicide immediately following California’s 10-day waiting period between purchase and acquisition of a firearm; second, although the absolute risk of suicide is higher among men than among women, new handgun ownership is associated with a disproportionately greater increase in death by suicide among women.

    The investigators identified handgun acquisitions among California residents on the state’s voter rolls, developing a cohort of more than 26 million people who had no record of handgun ownership. Over an average of 6.9 years of follow-up, 2.6% of the cohort obtained at least one new handgun; approximately 18,000 suicides were observed, with nearly 40% completed with firearms. The finding of an association between firearm ownership and death by suicide is not surprising. Analyses conducted over decades have shown that access to a firearm is an independent risk factor for death by suicide, driven by the lethality of attempts with guns.3,4 However, this study is by far the largest, and to our knowledge the first, to focus on new firearm owners and to map the time from acquisition, allowing for one of the most granular examinations to date.

    Among the new findings reported in this study is the sharp increase in death by suicide with a firearm immediately after a handgun has been acquired following a mandatory 10-day waiting period — that is, 11 to 30 days after the purchase of the gun (hazard ratio, 100.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 55.8 to 179.9). The fact that the risk of death from suicide is 100 times as high in the 20 days after a handgun has been acquired as before acquisition of the handgun suggests that the gun was acquired with deadly intent. A second major finding relates to handgun ownership and risk of suicide according to gender. Women who were new handgun owners were more likely to die by suicide with a firearm than women who did not own a gun (hazard ratio, 35.2; 95% CI, 29.6 to 41.8), representing a much greater increase in risk than that observed in men (hazard ratio, 7.8; 95% CI, 7.3 to 8.4).

    This study has several implications for clinical care and suicide prevention. First, any assessment of suicide risk should include inquiries about recent gun ownership and access to firearms. Second, inquiries about gun ownership should not be limited to men, and new gun ownership in the presence of other risk factors for suicide may indicate an immediate and urgent need to assess and mitigate risk. Finally, suicide prevention efforts may benefit from greater partnerships with gun-shop owners.5,6 This approach leverages the potential for gun shops to disseminate suicide prevention information to buyers who might be at risk at the point of sale. Gun-shop owners often represent trusted voices among gun owners, offering a potential pathway to raise awareness about suicide and to depoliticize efforts to prevent gun violence.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Disagree: botazefa
  4. Neb Fox has the spelling of South right, and Lock Pro the spelling of north.

    Someone who disagrees with them runs FoundingFathers.org, which argues that Dixie was insanely rich, and even that Africans volunteered to get on the slave ships. He does make a good point in that it was the long coastline and the Port of New Orleans that the Union really wanted and– less strong a point– needed. Iowa or Illinois alone could have fed a truncated Union.

    https://www.foundingfathers.org/Papers/Slavery/Default.aspx

    Early in this century, a fellow named Dennis Wheeler argued that the Southern cause couldn’t be defended without a vigorous moral case for slavery– and he proceeded to produce one. I presume he’s the same fellow on this page: https://zork.net/~googol/odrecover/wayback/f-44.html

    However, to defend slavery necessarily means defending multiracialism, or the enslavement of members of one’s own race. Which is more gag-inducing?

  5. @JohnPlywood

    …right wing culture in America has compelled millions of thoughtless, angsty individuals to stockpile firearms in the delusion that they are at risk of being a victim of violent crime; amidst a decline in violent crime that has been sustained for three decades.

    These paranoid and mentally deranged individuals, totally out of touch with their surroundings and indoctrinated by filthy right wing lies about crime, are at an increased risk of shooting themselves. The risk of suicide is directly proportional to the sordid right wing lies propaganda consumed.

    The American suicide rate isn’t a matter of despair. It’s a matter of guns and irrationality.
    The obvious solution to this minor issue is to vote Biden-Duckworth 2020, and deliver our Fatherland from the gun peddling scum.

    • Replies: @botazefa
    , @anon
  6. Twinkie says:

    I suspect the perceived optimal arrangement to be the inverse–Democrats take the Senate, extend their advantage in the House, and Trump squeaks by in a narrow Electoral College victory while losing the popular vote by an even wider margin than in 2016.

    I disagree. I think they want to win it all. Human beings, by and large, are not rational. They are emotional creatures who rationalize their irrational decisions with post-facto analysis. Although leftists in general may be more moderate in sentiments, those in charge – the core – is highly totalitarian in instinct.

    Is Saudi Arabia, rich from oil in a kingdom maintained by foreign laborers, really as affluent as the Netherlands? Their purchasing power parities are at, well, parity.

    Yes, but their Gini indexes are very different – Saudi Arabia 45.9 and the Netherlands at 30.3. Sadly, that of the United States is closer to the former than the latter at 45.0.

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html

    • Agree: SIMP simp
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  7. neutral says:

    Would the US have really been worse off and poorer if slavery ended around 1800

    Would have made no difference, the reality is that the ideals of the “founding fathers” were more destructive than even the teachings of Marx. Yes, they would not support this black/homosexual worshiping madness, but their radicalism of breaking with Europe and their embrace of the proto SJWs of their time, lead to where the USA is now. If you accept equality as your number one fundamental ideal it can only lead to where it got to now.

  8. nebulafox says:
    @neutral

    The Founding Fathers were geniuses. Flawed geniuses, human geniuses, mortal men who created structures that cannot take the infinite levels of beatings our modern elites are dishing out. But structures that can take a lot more beatings than any other system I’ve seen.

    >Would have made no difference, the reality is that the ideals of the “founding fathers” were more destructive than even the teachings of Marx.

    I suppose you are the type who advocates hanging an 11 year boy who pickpocketed your handkerchief in order not to starve, or didn’t step into the gutter as a nobleman passed. That was Old Europe for you. The American Revolution represented the first, imperfect but real step away from the cruelty that has been the norm for most of human history in dealing with most ordinary people.

    >If you accept equality as your number one fundamental ideal it can only lead to where it got to now.

    Equality before the state and the law is not the same thing as “everybody is equal and will have equal outcomes in life”. America’s problem right now is that our insane focus on the latter is letting our elites erode the former.

    Personally, I think mocking and devaluing someone with an IQ of 90 for not becoming a doctor is counterproductive and cruel. Understanding and accepting innate differences in intelligence should make one more compassionate, not less.

  9. nebulafox says:
    @nebulafox

    More importantly: every now and again in history, you have men who rise to the top from nowhere, for better or for worse. Themistocles, Liu Bang, Aurelian, Leo III of Byzantium, Zhu Yuanzhang, Toyotomi Hideyoshi. But the American Revolution was one of the first steps to making that a feasible aspiration for anybody with the right talents and drive: and in ways more conducive to society than launching military coups.

    It’s exceedingly telling that the modern progressivism is fanatical about crendentialism. They want neo-feudalism, on some level. They debate about how to best get the underclass to accept their lot and who is a Goodchild and who is a Badchild… but that fundamentally controlling streak is there.

    • Replies: @SFG
  10. Twinkie says:
    @nebulafox

    I suppose you are the type who advocates hanging an 11 year boy who pickpocketed your handkerchief in order not to starve, or didn’t step into the gutter as a nobleman passed. That was Old Europe for you.

    That’s because many Americans have this notion that they’d been the nobles in such a historical context, instead of the oppressed peons they’d have been more likely.

    There is a similar dynamic at work when American middle class people visit other countries and mingle with the upscale parts/people of the latter and start babbling about how great life is in those countries.

    The mass affluence of America deluded many Americans about the lot of ordinary people in so much of the world, even relatively developed places.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
  11. Talha says:
    @nebulafox

    The Founding Fathers were geniuses. Flawed geniuses, human geniuses

    Completely agree. And I’d personally say, it was pretty incredible (providential even) that so many men of such talents were gathered together at the same time and in the same location in history.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Yahya K.
  12. neutral says:
    @nebulafox

    Equality before the state and the law is not the same thing as “everybody is equal and will have equal outcomes in life”

    In the end they are the same, they put equality as the ultimate ideal (when in fact it is pure evil), and the real world has proved that is the case.

    As for this “I think mocking and devaluing someone”, this is the type of argument that all SJWs use to defend whatever new victim class they have invented. Mocking is very much something that one observes from leftists in all their comedy routines (mocking lower class white people only). People that say moron level IQs should not be seen as equal to higher IQs say so because the dire consequences of such a flawed belief, it is not mocking, it is a very serious take on this problem.

    • Replies: @botazefa
    , @Curmudgeon
  13. The author’s depiction of the South is nothing but falsehoods. The south was paying 86% of the cost of the national gov. but since they were out voted in congress they got none of the benefits like railroads. The south had been victimized by the unconstitutional tariffs for 36 years by the time of the War of Northern Aggression. Just like under the Romans, as long as the south paid tribute to the northern manufacturers and industrialists (many Jews) everything was ok.

    Cotton was the only export crop the country had at that time so the northern congress put import tariffs, some as high as 200% to force the agricultural south to buy goods from New England. The aim was not only to line the northern criminal pockets but to damage the southern economy. We still have personal letters from Lincoln’s Sec. of War and of State expressing the need to damage the south. The northern business interests knew that there would be a westward expansion and they were afraid that New England would be left in the cold while trade went down the Mississippi and out from New Orleans. That is why the northern radicals would not let the south go.

    They didn’t give a rats ass about the negroes who were treated much better in the south anyway. In fact some places such as New Orleans had more free black than slaves. Many of them who were slaves were so only in the nominal sense. 14,000 negroes owned slaves themselves and the biggest slave owner in S.C. at one point was a black man and former slave.

    Read the minutes of the northern congress Committee on the Conduct of the War and even you can see that the northern radicals would not have hesitated to kill every man, woman and child in the south if need be to satisfy their insatiable greed. You are a disgrace to the Unz Review Site.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  14. SFG says:
    @nebulafox

    I’d say it’s more that the activists want equality of result for all sexes/races/orientations/etc., and the elites see this as a way to (a) divide the lower and middle classes by race, so they sign on and (b) distract from class-based remedies that might weaken their position.

    Actual left-wing activists such as, say, the DSA do care about class but elite lefties downplay it for obvious reasons. It’s why the media loves to talk about BLM but not minimum wage hikes. But if you read Jacobin or the Nation they discuss these things.

    The race issue is what prevents an alliance of the populist left and right.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  15. Yahya K. says:

    Is Saudi Arabia, rich from oil in a kingdom maintained by foreign laborers, really as affluent as the Netherlands? Their purchasing power parities are at, well, parity.

    It’s not affluent in the traditional sense of everyone having good jobs and incomes. It’s affluent in the sense that everything here is affordable. Education, housing, gas, electricity etc. are subsidized by the government, and cheap foreign labor keeps the price of goods and services low. There is little taxation too. Oil pays for all of this.

    How is that relationship going to look in fifty years, though?

    Depends on the price of oil.

    The Netherlands definitely has a more sustainable model, notwithstanding their ageing population and changing demographics. (Although culturally, they seem content to go away gently into the night).

    The situation isn’t hopeless for oil countries though. Dubai and Oman were able to diversify away from oil (oil only makes up less than 5% of Dubai’s economy). The key is to attract high IQ immigrants from overseas. But the only way to do that really is turn your country into a foreigner’s haven. That’s going to be difficult for the more traditionalist Saudi Arabia.

    • Replies: @Talha
  16. Jatt Arya says:

    Lol America freedom, human cruelty, female rights bro.

    America can’t die soon enough।।

    • Agree: neutral
  17. Yahya K. says:
    @Talha

    And I’d personally say, it was pretty incredible (providential even) that so many men of such talents were gathered together at the same time and in the same location in history.

    And the population of America back then was only 2.5 million.

    America’s population today is 130 times larger today than it was in 1776.

    Where are all the new Washingtons and Franklins…

  18. @dfordoom

    All they have to do to “solve covid” is change the messaging to align with reality. 0.05% IFR. In fact they are already doing a version of this, claiming that Blue New York got the virus under control while Red Florida has sKyRoCkEtInG cAsEs.

    It’s not clear that they would want to stop covid hysteria under Biden, but they easily could. This is a meme disaster, they are cooking the books and lying about everything.

    They aren’t interested in fixing the economy, from their point of view the economy is ideal. Infinity money for the wealthy side of their coalition and angry, angry poverty at the bottom. Remember they have no desire to govern in the first place. They have been using black political machines as a vote bank for multiple generations now while material conditions for black people have gotten only worse. This is their model for the entire country. Perpetual poverty aka : extreme weakness.

    As for stopping the cultural revolution, no they again don’t have to and won’t. Deep blue cities are rioting against their deep blue governments and the mayors are joining in the rioting. There’s no reason this dynamic won’t just scale up to President Biden marching in the streets and nobody bothering to ask why their elected government is acting like it has no ability to do anything other than protest. “I’m with you! And I’m just like you, powerless to do anything!” because any such questioning from well meaning left gets purged.

    They don’t want Trump to win again because they are terrified 1. he might stumble in to actually getting revenge on them for what they’ve some and 2. they are terrified of what might happen within their own party.

    If Biden wins, they can purge the Bernie people and complete the realignment – become blatant professional class/wealthy party “acting on behalf of the oppressed” with increasing numbers of liberal urban whites who failed to enter the professional class sliding into the perpetual poverty vote bank.

    In the future where Dems are blatantly the party for the wealthy and they are applying in practice libertarian austerity policies, Hispanics — working class — can easily become a GOP constituency. Muh demographics is fake news.

    Bottom line point is anyone who says Biden winning would be a good thing is either insane or an enemy.

    If you think they don’t “really” want Biden to win, that’s just nuts. They want Biden to win. If for no other reason than simple corruption – the DNC want to get back on the executive branch money spigot. That alone is more than enough reason.

  19. Interesting, though I suspect the perceived optimal arrangement to be the inverse–Democrats take the Senate, extend their advantage in the House, and Trump squeaks by in a narrow Electoral College victory while losing the popular vote by an even wider margin than in 2016. They get their Goldstein, hated and completely hamstrung.

    Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Give that man a cigar! Inside of six weeks following inauguration day, the Left, aided by Oligarchs and the Deep State, will have brought down both Trump and Pence, installing a placeholder Pelosi administration to start filling up the seating and succession chart with a distinct plan rather than trusting matters to untidy, haphazard elections.

  20. 128 says:

    Well taxes in Singapore are only at 22% of marginal income max, but their gini coefficient is only 0.37, which is very good for a city state, vs. 0.45 for the US, regardless of race, so something other than taxes are going on here, but if you also deduct the mandatory housing and health fund contribution in Singapore, your take home pay is closer to only half of your gross salary. By the way income taxes in the US are not that low when you count federal plus state taxes, although the capital gains tax is a lot lower compared to EU countries, but even some minor fiddling like raising the capital gains tax to 25 percent and the top income tax rate to 45 percent will not make a significant dent on the US gini coefficient number.

  21. 128 says:

    Basically for some reason, taxation in the US is just very ineffective at reducing income inequality, compared to European countries, or other Anglo countries like Australia and Canada, even though taxes in the US are really not all that low, except for the capital gains tax. And the very high level of income inequality holds even controlling for race, so racial diversity really is not the explanation for income inequality, with even 90 plus percent white states like New Hampshire, Wyoming, and Montana having gini coefficients in the mid 0.40s.

  22. 128 says:

    Basically a good measure will be income supports aimed towards working individuals, basically the government will have income supplements to people who work at least 40 hours a week, expand Maedicare, and raise the minimum wage to the region of US$10 to US$12 an hour, but no higher, maybe giving requiring vacation leaves of at least 20 days a year, and getting rid of at will employment? People work a lot shorter in Western Europe compared to the US, with better labour protections, and the unemployment rate in Northwestern European countries is little different than the US.

  23. captflee says:

    When Ruffin pulled that lanyard on the Battery the southern states were “contributing” about 4/5 of the revenue taken in by the feral gooberment, little of which came home, being used, under Clay’s American System, for internal improvements, almost all at the north. Lincoln’s cry to the heavens upon hearing of his tax station in Charleston harbor being bombarded, was not, “But what of the poor black folk!”. No, he was worried about his newly increased tariff… Now I have known many yankees over the course of my lifetime, and am more than willing to admit the theoretical possibility of such a chimerical creature as has lately been retconned into being, the altruistic savior fighting for the dignity of an alien race, but never having encountered one, am forced to admit that the fellow headed for the burial ground, shovel on shoulder, having discovered that two pennies to close her eyelids had been buried with his old granny, is rather more representative of the species.

    • Agree: Rouetheday
    • Replies: @mark tapley
  24. @Yahya K.

    “Where are all the new Washingtons and Franklins …”

    Singing and dancing and rapping on stage with Hamilton.

    • Disagree: throtler
  25. Talha says:
    @Yahya K.

    Where are all the new Washingtons and Franklins…

    That’s why I mentioned it seems providential. I mean think about the entire Gulf region of today; do you think they could produce a single person like Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), a Khalid ibn Walid (ra) or an Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra)?

    And those men came out of ONE CITY.

    I guess we all to one degree or another stand on the shoulders of giants.

    Wa salaam.

    • Replies: @Yahya K.
  26. botazefa says:
    @JohnPlywood

    The American suicide rate isn’t a matter of despair. It’s a matter of guns and irrationality.

    The mechanics of suicide due to despair are easy enough for me to understand.

    You’re saying that without guns or irrational people we wouldn’t be seeing the increase in suicide. I think that is rather obviously not true. People who are committed to killing themselves will find a way. They need not be irrational and they don’t need a gun. Isn’t that obvious?

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    , @dfordoom
  27. botazefa says:
    @neutral

    In the end they are the same, they put equality as the ultimate ideal (when in fact it is pure evil), and the real world has proved that is the case.

    So you’re doubling down on tour wrong-headedness.

    A belief in equality before the law is a legal/ethical/philosophical position.

    Believing people are equal is an entirely different proposition, and the Founding Fathers didn’t believe such nonsense.

    Freedom is the ultimate ideal of the United States, not equality.

  28. Yahya K. says:
    @Talha

    And those men came out of ONE CITY.

    A tiny city too. How large would the population of a desert city have been back then? 5,000 people?

    I guess we all to one degree or another stand on the shoulders of giants.

    Good insight. I guess their strengths play on each other.

    Another aspect I think is the role of the environment. All these men had intrinsic talent, but I wonder what they’d be like if they were reared in today’s environment of affluence and comfort. I think to some extent you need to struggle to maximize your strength and potential.

    Asalaam.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @nebulafox
  29. Talha says:
    @Yahya K.

    Although culturally, they seem content to go away gently into the night.

    I know a Muslim couple who had difficulty conceiving. Many, many years of prayer and thousands of their own dollars later, they were blessed with a son then a daughter. And there are some types of people that feel entitled to abort their babies on someone’s tax dollar.

    Is it surprising one type will stick around and another won’t?

    That’s going to be difficult for the more traditionalist Saudi Arabia.

    It may not be. they need to know how to leverage religion in that way. I have come across plenty of very educated and intelligent Muslims in the US (mostly So Cal) who wouldn’t have had any problem moving and living in Saudi IF they were granted full citizenship. Also…

    Wa salaam.

    [MORE]

    I remember in particular an Egyptian uncle who was huge in the halal finance business who told me and my friends directly that Saudi screwed up badly in that regard. Due to his business, he had many high-end contacts in the US Muslim business community; doctors, engineers, professors in universities, other businessmen, etc. He said many of these guys (Egyptians, Lebanese, Syrian, etc.) would have readily moved to Saudi in the 70s and 80s instead of the US IF Saudi had given them the same deal the US was giving them; full citizenship and property ownership rights. The second thing would be not letting Wahhabi-Salafis clock all other Muslim interpretations over the head with their relatively nonintellectual take on Islamic doctrines.

    You even get guys like this; Napoleon* used to be a member of Tupac’s crew – he converted, moved his family to Saudi and opened up a couple of restaurants/cafes there:

    Some brothers have been living there for decades:

    So the potential is definitely there (as it will always be as long as that area contains Makkah and Madinah); my teachers themselves have stated to keep Saudi in mind when thinking of places to move to.

  30. Talha says:
    @Yahya K.

    All these men had intrinsic talent

    Good point – potential vs the environment and circumstances to be turned into kinetic.

    I wonder what they’d be like if they were reared in today’s environment of affluence and comfort.

    In one pic:

    Wa salaam.

  31. @botazefa

    That’s not what’s happening in Europe, where the alt-right narrative would have us to believe that white people are “defeated”, as well. As I showed, the male suicide rate in Sweden is actually decreasing, and young adult suicides in Greece have declined as well.

    The common denominator among Europeans is lower rates of firearm ownership, and a media that strictly controls right wing propaganda.

    US homicide rate: 4.6 per 100,000
    US suicide by gunshot rate: 6.9 per 100,000

    Fact: Taking guns out of the households in America would reduce the total number of gunshot inflicted deaths more so than deporting every black and Hispanic in America.

    Fact: Nobody kills more people in this country than white male gun owners do.

    Show you care, conservatives. Vote Biden-Duckworth 2020 and turn your firearms over to the nearest police department.

    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232252

    Methods
    We compared 2016 US suicide fatality rates–standardized within fourteen sex-specific age groups to reflect the ethnic composition of Canada–to 2016 Canadian suicide rates. We then calculated the number and proportion of suicides that could be averted in the US if the US had the same rates of suicide as in Canada.

    Results
    If the US had the same suicide rates as in Canada, we estimate there would be approximately 25.9% fewer US suicide fatalities, equivalent to 11,630 suicide fatalities averted each year. This decline would be driven by a 79.3% lower rate of firearm-specific suicide fatalities. The male suicide fatality rate would be 28.8% lower and equivalent to 9,992 fewer suicide fatalities each year. The female suicide fatality rate would be 16.0% lower and equivalent to 1,638 fewer suicide fatalities each year. While 36% of firearm suicide fatalities could be replaced by non-firearm suicide fatalities, 64% of firearm fatalities could be averted entirely.

    Conclusions
    US policymakers may wish to consider policies that would reduce rates of firearm ownership, given that that about 26% of US suicide fatalities might be averted if the US had the same suicide rates as in Canada, a country with drastically lower firearm ownership rates.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @anon
    , @Brett
  32. @JohnPlywood

    Agree that to some extent, the causes of so profound a decision as suicide are imponderable. Still, trends can emerge. Sweden is increasingly less Swedes and increasingly more people who would rather kill Swedes than kill themselves, so that can be a factor. Also, I seem to recall there used to be a bit of a narcotics crisis among the young in the 1970s-1980s, so some suicide and despair fallout there isn’t surprising.

    As far as firearms go, Steve covered before how a chunk of “gun violence” stats is actually old (or sick) white guys deciding to end-it-now. And to do that, yes, they have to buy a firearm, as the figures show. And I agree it wouldn’t be bad to try to discourage suicides at point of sale.

    Since you know that the rising tide of colored crime is just a “filthy” rightwing conspiracy theory, you have of course exploited this knowledge by moving to cheap real estate in a colored neighborhood, right?

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  33. an extra layer of discord to keep the public at each other’s throats instead of the Uniparty’s

    Thanks to politicizing everything and canceling everyone with the wrong opinions, they are rapidly running out of ways to keep people distracted.

    Sports: in-your-face wokism
    Film: in-your-face wokism
    Having an opinion on social media: in-your-face wokism
    Walking down the street without a mask: in-your-face wokism

    They may be painting themselves right into a corner.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  34. songbird says:

    Fifty years is probably a worse timeline for Dutchmen than for Saudis. That is, provided the reserve estimates are correct and there are no new breakthrough energy technologies.

  35. anon[428] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnPlywood

    The obvious solution to this minor issue is to vote Biden-Duckworth 2020, and deliver our Fatherland from the gun peddling scum.

    Obvious trolling shill is obvious. Funny how this site attracts such, especially in election years.

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  36. Rahan says:

    Let’s see how the cunning plan of UK and US conservatives to import half of Hong Kong and get them to be a “Cuban-style” anti-communist voter block goes.

    It would be hilarious if they turn out to be leftist hipsters when placed inside an anglospherical context…

    I’d also like to mention my pet peeve. Blue is the color of conservatism across the whole world. Red is the color of reds. Can the US please go back to this? Not only is this confusing to much of the rest of the world, but a lot of “blues” overseas are instinctively inclined to support “blues” everywhere else, and see “reds” as damn commies.

    • Replies: @mark tapley
    , @dfordoom
  37. @Almost Missouri

    Less than 13% of Sweden’s population is non-European, so the changing demographics of Sweden is not going to alter the suicide rate by much.

    The total number of homicides in Sweden today is only marginally higher than it was in the 1960s, despite the population increasing by around 2 million during that time:


    So the immigrants are doing a really shitty job at killing Swedes, if that’s what you say they want to do.

    White, Asian and Mestizo people are gentrifying black neighborhoods left and right now that US crime rates are falling near European levels. Watts, California, previously known as one of the most violent cities in America and a hotbed for black radicalism and gangs, is now becoming white.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/gqwa74/watts-is-being-gentrified

    America’s Worst Housing Project Is Being Gentrified

    Have you ever simultaneously regretted that the poor had been pushed out of a neighborhood, but wished you could have gotten in when rents were still cheap? Have you ever admired the pluck and ingenuity of the first few nonpoor bastards to move into a poor area? I have.

    The Los Angeles City Council just unanimously voted to tear down Jordan Downs, nearly the oldest housing project in America and probably the title holder for ugliest. Jordan Downs is comprised of 103 spookily identical buildings in the low-income, violence-ridden neighborhood of Watts. While notorious for its gangs, its racially tinged police brutality, and its intractable poverty, Watts is also noteworthy for its cultural vibrancy and the palpable neighborhood pride of its residents. I wrote that last sentence by the way, not the Watts Chamber of Commerce, but they can have it for free.

    A group called The Michaels Organization is one of the principal entities taking the helm on this project, according to the LA Times. They’re responsible for the reimagining of the Robert Taylor Homes project in Chicago’s Bronzeville. As you might, expect, rents in the area have since gone up, quite a bit. The adjacent South Loop neighborhood now includes the third fastest gentrifying neighborhood in America, and from the 2000s to the teens, the percentage of whites in the 60604 area code went from 37.7 to 75.4.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  38. @nebulafox

    Before the American founders, Territories or countries had always been founded by whoever had the most power. The United States was the first case where the elite sought to limit the power of the government and establish the individual as having unalienable rights protected by the rule of law. Our liberties are our most important asset. With the loss of states rights and the beginning of the big crony state under the tyrant Lincoln and then the establishment of the banking cartel the U.S. was transferred to just another European style socialist “democracy.” The main strategy of the current fake virus is to condition the cattle so that they are easier to control. This latest in a long line of viral, medical frauds has been planned for 10 years. Sprung now the cover another big theft by the central bank with congresses approval. – My other posts need to be released.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  39. @Rahan

    Did not know about importing Hong Kong Chinese. That would probably be one of the best groups anywhere for good work ethic and family structure. Maybe we could make a deal. Give us the pop. of Hong Kong and we give them Detroit, Chicago and Newark. Will even throw in Camden.

    People in the U.S. should learn that red or blue, liberal or conservative makes no difference as long as you are a Zionist and take orders from Netanyahu and the big Jews that donate to both fake political parties. Just like our top shabbos goy puppet actors put-up by the Jews now including Trump, Pence , Biden and Pelosi.

  40. @neutral

    In the end they are the same, they put equality as the ultimate ideal (when in fact it is pure evil), and the real world has proved that is the case.

    The ultimate ideal of equal outcome is pure evil.
    My friend went to Olympic trials for 800m. We grew up together and went to the same schools. I’d have been fortunate, on my best day, to have been within 10 seconds of his times. On the other hand, he couldn’t come close to me in shot put. I had the equal opportunity to him to run and he had the equal opportunity to me to put the shot.
    Nobody is equal when it comes to outcomes. That is the real world.

  41. How did Hate become almost synonymous with Hilarity?

    Case in point: (you can’t make this stuff up)

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    , @dfordoom
  42. usNthem says:

    No matter how the election turns out, assuming there even is one, a massive FUBAR clusterf*** will be the result. I plan on leaving our city for a more remote location come sometime in October.

  43. neutral says:
    @botazefa

    I will infinity down on this stupid equality nonsense. “Equality before the law” or “equality of outc0mes” both make equality the core of everything, one always leads to the other, all real world evidence in every country that considers equality sacred shows this.

    • Replies: @botazefa
  44. @captflee

    Charleston was a set up in order to get the South to fire the fist shot. The North had agreed since Buchanan was still in office to remove the troops from the fort that was of little consequence to the North in the first place. The southerners even continued to sent food and supplies all this time. Failing to get the South to attack Lincoln finally sent in 15 war ships to provoke them.

    The south sent emissaries to meet with Lincoln 4 times before the the start of the war but he would not meet with them. Any half reasonable person would have lowered the tariffs a little and the entire catastrophe would have been avoided.

    Over 200 news papers were shut down in the north and ap. 15,000 people were imprisoned with no due process for opposing the war. Lincoln had a 3 point platform. No. 1 Tariffs for his New England Manufacturing power base. No 2. A big Mercantile type crony federal gov. No 3. A central bank with fiat money power to expand the gov.

    The famous greenbacks were another fraud because no one would take the paper junk except at a big discount. California would not accept them at all. Finally they were bought up by the Rothschilds and other Jew bankers for about a quarter of face value and then redeemed for gold at full value. It’s no wonder that the sodomite and murderer A. Lincoln is an icon for the Zionist criminals. He is an example for dictators all over the world. Lincoln showed them that all they have to do is create a phony contingency of some type then wave the flag and the people will not only attack their own country men but even kill their neighbors and relatives.

  45. @Priss Factor

    I almost hit ‘LOL’, but it’s actually really quite instructive on a couple of fronts.

    Firstly, it’s a lovely example of ‘capture theory’ – where the infiltrators try to insinuate themselves into positions in an organisational hierarchy, then bend policy to their group objectives. It’s like they learned a lesson from Zionism’s efforts at capturing the commanding heights of Wikipedia editing.

    Second, it shows how aggressive fake-women are relative to actual women – even bull dykes are no match for mentally-ill men in dresses… maleness plus mental illness are intensity-multipliers.

    Third, it goes to what I said yesterday about WokeBorg being on a path towards fragmentation (I specifically used the example of feminists and lesbians being fed up with pushy men in dresses). There’s now a widening rift between BLM and their erstwhile Jewish supporters, too.

    .

    Going back to the mentally-ill dudes in dresses: it’s really interesting to compare them to girls playing grown-up tomboy. The latter seem far less “full of passionate intensity” and don’t appear to be a problem in the male gay community – mostly because they’re not attracted to men, which raises the question as to why fake-females are trying to get poontang by chasing fur-munchers.

    F2Ms [sid] barely noticeable as a source of social grievance, too – they don’t seem all that active in the WokeBorg (or if they are they, don’t stand out).

    That might also be because F2Ms [sic] who try to do the full-on fake man schtick (i.e., hormones and fake dicks) come across as flabby, short, weak men – transcucks – whereas WokeBorg M2Fs [sic] mostly look like parodies of gross ugly women (there are non-WokeBorg M2Fs [sic] where you look at them and understand why they made that decision).

    NB: [sic] because neither F2M nor M2F actually become M (or F, as the case may be). They become neuter ersatz versions. Not saying that an infertile biological man (or woman) is not a man, but people getting their dicks cut off (or their vag turned inside out) are doing that shit deliberately to try and be something, and they can’t ever be that thing.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  46. @nebulafox

    The Founding Fathers were geniuses.

    They weren’t stupid but they definitely weren’t “geniuses” either. Most of their writings aren’t particularly brilliant and the most insightful parts are generally copied, sometimes verbatim, from earlier philosophers who they drew inspiration from. If you truly believe in the ideals of the revolution, the people you should consider “geniuses” are the formulators of those ideals like Locke and Montesquieu, not their later admirers.

    But structures that can take a lot more beatings than any other system I’ve seen.

    The US isn’t even 250 years old yet. The French Ancient Regime lasted almost a thousand despite countless invasions and crises. Get back to me ~AD 2400 and then we can start to talk about the durability of America’s “structures.”

    I suppose you are the type who advocates hanging an 11 year boy who pickpocketed your handkerchief in order not to starve, or didn’t step into the gutter as a nobleman passed. That was Old Europe for you. The American Revolution represented the first, imperfect but real step away from the cruelty that has been the norm for most of human history in dealing with most ordinary people.

    One of the most embarrassingly sycophantic bits of propaganda I’ve ever read in my life. The vast majority of colonial/state criminal codes were entirely unchanged from before to after the revolution. It caused absolutely no tangible reduction in “cruelty.” Later European history showed no particular correlation between how “liberal” or republican a nation was and how severe its punishments were. In fact if anything it was the the other way around; France had a notoriously cruel penal system well into the 1950s, while Tsarist Russia had basically abolished capital punishment by the 1890s.

    Britain’s famously strict system was, like mass enslavement of Africans, a product of the Enlightenment systems you so admire, not the earlier medieval period. The number of offences punishable by death increased by a factor of 4 from 1688 (the leftist “glorious revolution”) to 1776.

    Equality before the state and the law is not the same thing as “everybody is equal and will have equal outcomes in life”.

    You say this, but most of the founders explicitly based their values on Locke and his now-discredited “blank-slatism.” But I’m open to seeing some more evidence to support your claim here. It’s hard to say what they actually believed because neither type of theoretical equality was reflected in their actions.

    Personally, I think mocking and devaluing someone with an IQ of 90 for not becoming a doctor is counterproductive and cruel. Understanding and accepting innate differences in intelligence should make one more compassionate, not less.

    On this we agree.

    • Replies: @usNthem
    , @Twinkie
  47. @neutral

    …the reality is that the ideals of the “founding fathers” were more destructive than even the teachings of Marx.

    Indeed, Marxism teaches a purely economic equality (“from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”) which, while probably unfeasible, is still far less extreme and far more practical than the absolute metaphysical sort of equality espoused by some of the founders.

    On the other hand, the founders were much less overtly materialistic and hostile to religion, so it’s not as clear cut. To me the highly spiritual and in some ways traditionalist, but economically very “progressive,” writings of Romantic era British socialists like Blake and William Morris combine the best elements of both and represent leftism at its peak.

  48. @JohnPlywood

    Suicide rates do not correlate to firearms ownership rates internationally.

    https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country

    US is only 27th despite having by far the highest firearm ownership rate in the world. Ahead of it are a number of advanced Asian and European nations with very restrictive firearms ownership laws and much lower rates of ownership — near zero in some cases.

    People don’t kill themselves because there is a gun in the house. They kill themselves for other reasons and if a gun is present will often choose it, because it is simple and effective. Lacking a gun, the suicidal have no problem finding ways to end themselves.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  49. anon[321] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnPlywood

    The common denominator among Europeans is lower rates of firearm ownership, and a media that strictly controls right wing propaganda.

    Lol, what a stack of lies!

    Obvious trolling shill is obvious.

    We can expect more obvious, paid shills for the next 4 months.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  50. Art says:

    Is Saudi Arabia, rich from oil in a kingdom maintained by foreign laborers, really as affluent as the Netherlands?

    Saudi is an evil just like Israel is.

    Semite Saudi Arabia has financed Muslim hate schools all over the Muslim world. Wahhabism is a curse on humanity, just like Semite Zionism is. Both have aided and financed Aleida and ISIS and their killing.

    It is time to hold the Semites, Saudi and Israel, responsible for the self serving trouble they have caused the world.

    America must dump them both. Bring back our troops – and let them fight out their Semitic tribal differences.

  51. ” Yes, they would not support this black/homosexual worshiping madness, but their radicalism of breaking with Europe and their embrace of the proto SJWs of their time, lead to where the USA is now. ”

    I hae been quite content to allow the merry-go-round progress without comment. It’s clear that for some reason the majority population yeains largely unjinged by events as much as the left has engaged in unhinging behavior..

    The above comment so ridiculously mangled — it makes perfect sense why the most of 43 million blacks have no intention of supporting anything close to the current executive.

    There are blacks who choose same sex expression — and engage in the peculiarities of transvestism, etc. But that is not at all part o a major concern for blacks. That so many continue to blend the issues of blacks with those of primarily whites non-bread and butter concerns is simply beyond me.

    And what is funny is that the author has more than once provided data indicating that blacks as a population on social and political issues rate fairly conservatively.

    But despite that, someone will come along and make this kind of blurred false representation and lo and behold others will join in a sing along. BLM has a fairly broad agenda, but the their issues regarding blacks/african americans resonates based on the issue not the overarching agenda. I do get the political side showing in an attempt to gin up votes — but I am beginning to think — it’s a waste of valuable critical thought.

    This is not rocket science, You don; have to agree that the country is systemically harder for blacks, but one need not be so obtuse and reactionary. And you have been this manner of reactionary for more than five decades and yet the liberal agenda just marches forward — and almost all the negative shifts advanced by whites. At some point in time, one would think, you would wake up and actually taste what you ave been shoveling —

    at east pretend you comprehend the nuance of political and social discourse to agendas of various groups and why they might bond together. In the case of the lack population — republicans simply blew it. In terms of issues, blacks as did Southerners make a practical decision in which party best represented their concerns. For white southerners, just a little hop. For blacks, they have to carry a mountain of nonsense very little which they have benefited from. Though crumbs are better than a single crumb.

  52. botazefa says:
    @neutral

    I will infinity down on this stupid equality nonsense. “Equality before the law” or “equality of outc0mes” both make equality the core of everything, one always leads to the other, all real world evidence in every country that considers equality sacred shows this.

    I don’t think equality of outcomes is the foundation upon which the US was formed. You feel otherwise. That’s okay. The nice thing about Unz is that people are FREE to disagree. That’s a great thing, no matter how you slice it.

  53. @Cloudbuster

    Sorry Cloudbuster but gun ownership is correlated with suicide internationally.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/14712990_International_Correlations_Between_Gun_Ownership_and_Rates_of_Homicide_and_Suicide

    To examine international correlations between reported rates of household gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide with a gun. Survey. People who responded to a telephone survey conducted by the 1989 International Crime Survey in 11 European countries, Australia, Canada and the United States. Positive correlations were obtained between the rates of household gun ownership and the national rates of homicide and suicide as well as the proportions of homicides and suicides committed with a gun. There was no negative correlation between the rates of ownership and the rates of homicide and suicide committed by other means; this indicated that the other means were not used to “compensate” for the absence of guns in countries with a lower rate of gun ownership. Larger studies are needed to examine more closely possible confounding factors such as the national tendency toward violent solutions, and more information on the type and availability of guns will be helpful in future studies. Nevertheless, the correlations detected in this study suggest that the presence of a gun in the home increases the likelihood of homicide or suicide.

    Several of the countries ahead of America of your list (Russia, Ukraine, Switzerland, etc) are saturated with firearms. If we exclude third world countries and economically challenged Eastern Euro countries, the USA and Switzerland are among the top 1st world European countries in terms of suicide.

    It is true that Korea and Japan are ahead of the USA, but those cultures have long had suicidal tendencies going back to the pre-modern era. And they USED to have strong gun cultures. The point of the research in to gun suicides is not just that having a gun makes you more likely to suicide. People who are more likely to suicide are more likely to have guns, ndncultures that incorprated guns and weapons are more suicidal.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Twinkie
  54. usNthem says:
    @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    I’d prefer to mock the institution that allowed someone with an IQ of 90 to become a doctor. The wonders of AA have probably given us many of those.

  55. dfordoom says: • Website
    @botazefa

    You’re saying that without guns or irrational people we wouldn’t be seeing the increase in suicide.

    The issue with guns and suicide has nothing to do with an increase in suicide attempts. Guns simply make it much more likely that those suicide attempts will succeed. So, obviously, with lots of guns you’re going to have a higher rate of actual successful suicides.

    So if there is increased despair leading to more suicide attempts (and I don’t think there’s strong evidence that this is the case) then more guns will lead to more actual suicides.

    It’s quite possible that the whole “deaths of despair” thing is a myth, and that higher rates of suicide are purely a function of more guns.

    If you want a society with lots and lots and lots of guns you’re going to have high suicide rates. That’s an unpleasant truth that can’t be evaded. So then you have to ask yourself if a high rate of gun ownership is such a good thing that it’s worth putting up with the resulting high death toll from suicide.

  56. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rahan

    Let’s see how the cunning plan of UK and US conservatives to import half of Hong Kong and get them to be a “Cuban-style” anti-communist voter block goes.

    It would be hilarious if they turn out to be leftist hipsters when placed inside an anglospherical context…

    Yep.

    Even if they don’t turn out to be leftist hipsters there’s a good chance their children will.

    There seems to be a lot of “Hong Kong Chinese are natural Tories” and “Hong Kong Chinese are natural Republicans” thinking going on.

    The whole business says a lot about the mind-numbing stupidity of UK and US conservatives.

  57. dfordoom says: • Website
    @mark tapley

    The United States was the first case where the elite sought to limit the power of the government and establish the individual as having unalienable rights protected by the rule of law.

    Are you sure the elite weren’t more concerned with protecting the inalienable rights of the elite? That’s how elites usually operate. I suppose there may be a case in history where an elite has actually concerned itself with the interests on non-elites. Can anyone name one?

    • Replies: @mark tapley
  58. @dfordoom

    See my earlier comment. Internationally, rate of firearms ownership does not correlate with suicide rate.

  59. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    If you want to be a lesbian today you have to learn to check your Vagina Privilege at the door.

    Seriously, this fits in with my theory that actual lesbians (you know, the biological women who want to have sex with biological women) are about to get purged en masse from the LGBTwhatever alliance and from the Coalition of the Fringes. And they’re about to get seriously demonised.

    We live in a world in which old school lesbians are, by the standards of the day, social conservatives.

    Maybe we need to start some Lesbians Are Natural Conservatives memes.

  60. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Kratoklastes

    Second, it shows how aggressive fake-women are relative to actual women – even bull dykes are no match for mentally-ill men in dresses… maleness plus mental illness are intensity-multipliers.

    They’re often aggressive towards other women to the point of actual violence. There have been numerous cases of lesbians being beaten up by M2F trannies. Often for political reasons – the lesbians get beaten up for being evil oppressors. They’ll beat up straight women as well.

    You’re right about the intensity-multiplier effect – their violence is sudden, unpredictable and extreme.

    It’s pretty clear that they hate biological women. The whole M2F thing is intensely misogynistic. I wonder when women will finally realise that?

  61. 216 says:

    o/t

    Why conservatives lose

    They can’t just say two words “Boycott NFL” or three “Turn it off”

    • Replies: @mark tapley
    , @A123
  62. @dfordoom

    I believe they tried to create a system that did the most good for the most people. For example take George Washington and George Mason both wealth Virginia planters. They had done well under the British system. They both had nothing to gain and would have been hanged had the revolution failed. Most people gave it little chance of success. Most of the others were in a similar situation.

    They had all been through the British Mercantile crony gov. system similar to what we have now. The founders rejected the fiat system, outlawing anything other than gold and silver for payment of “bills of credit.” The elite always want a central bank cartel in private hands. Washington did allow a fiat bank fronting for the British to be set up at the request of British Ally Hamilton but it was opposed by Jefferson and Madison. This conflict is what caused the War of 1812 after Jefferson let the banks charter expire.

    Madison realized that too much power cannot be given to the people or they would get their hand in the till as he said. And you could not give too much power to the aristocrats or as he said, they would enslave everyone else. They attempted to solve this problem by creating an upper house (Senate to represent the sovereign States and a lower house (House of Rep.) to represent the people. This was subverted in 1913 by making the Senate a direct election.

    The graduated Income tax was and is unconstitutional(one of the planks of the Communist (Jew) Manifesto) and was not allowed by out founders. All taxes had to be proportioned according to population. The Norths illegal and unconstitutional tariffs are what caused the War of Northern Agression in a genocidal war against the Southern people who just wanted to be left alone. All powers of the national gov. had to be strictly deligated and enumerated as per the 10th amendment. The power of the president was very limited and there were no executive orders as in shabbos goy Trumps recent order squelching freedom of speech on college campuses to limit so called antisemitism. Foreign Aid was out of the question so there could be no 11 million per day going to the thugs in Israel.

    The founders basically wanted a government that protected property rights and enforced contracts, provided defense from invasion (but did not want a navy, a clear sign of imperialism) or a large standing army of men that had no useful function in regular society and were feeding on the taxpayers and always likely to be a problem. Finally they wanted a court system with local law enforcement.

    If we had adhered the Constitution as they intended we would still be a beacon of freedom and hope to the world, admired and respected everywhere. Instead we have become an agent and shabbos goy operative and satellite for the Zionist agenda as expounded at the first Zionist International Convention in 1897. We have furnished the blood and treasure for their wars and continue to advance their cause from 911 and WMD’s, our Israeli Foreign Legion (U.S. Military) to fulfill the Yinnon plan for Greater Israel, phony proposals such as Al Gore’s (original shills for Jew Armand Hammer) global warming, false flag shootings like Los Vegas and never ending race baiting like fake Floyd. Their most effective psyop so far has been the medical Corona fraud, preceded by many others as well as the AIDS scam. The covid had been planned for at least 10 years but is now used as a cover for the trillions just stolen by the global bankers with consent of our shabbos goy congress that vote according to aIPAC.

    Jefferson warned that “only a moral and enlightened people could rule themselves .” Now instead of enjoying the liberties of individuals in a Republic of sovereign States we are experiencing the demoralization and destabilization of a “Democracy run by the Zionist Jews.”

  63. @216

    Don’t let Huckabee fool you. He is just another Zionist politician with the typical religious conservative facade. Another Israel zealot, like Trump, Biden, Pence, Pelosi and all the rest. Makes no difference wether these puppet actors front for the Dem. or Rep. paradigm as long as they shill for the Zionist Jews that fund both groups.

  64. A123 says:
    @216

    The Redskins have decided to keep their name….

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    • LOL: usNthem
  65. Nodwink on how the appearance of divided government is what the Uniparty prefers on account of it adding an extra layer of discord to keep the public at each other’s throats instead of the Uniparty’s:

    This is almost certainly true insofar as the Uniparty is the “continuation of the status quo except more for me” Party. You’ll also note that when a single party occupies all three branches they tend to lose focus and accomplish very little until their opponent regains either power in the executive or legislative. There’s always a minority loudly bleating for more goodies and it appears that the goodies are dispersed in proportion to the volume of noise made, this is of small concern given the money expended on the political charade.

  66. anon[187] • Disclaimer says:

    the South hadn’t proceeded to drag the nation down?

    Please. The nation was dragged down by the ideology of the puritan North, which started that war: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-mo96i_4iI

    You see the result of their war on the streets now in the form of perpetual social revolution. As Anatoly Karlin has pointed out, it’s really the Eastern portion of the United States that has pioneered the worst elements of SJWism over the decades; that has been true since the 1840s. Western states like California only picked up on what their Yankee brethren pioneered. If the South had won that war, everyone would be better off now. The toxic Northern ideology of egalitarianism ultimately doomed this country. The South didn’t do that.

    The OP also misunderstands the economy of the antebellum South vs. North. Southern states were more lightly populated and relatively larger than New England states. Southern states also had issues with warm water ports, which was less of a problem in smaller New England states. Therefore, the economic model pioneered in the North wouldn’t have translated as easily into a viable economy in the South at that time, not without mass immigration from Germany and Ireland, etc. Slaves were used because there simply wasn’t the manpower available to perform the same jobs at the same scale cheaply until the technology advanced. Further, the antebellum South was actually relatively wealthy. There was no “dragging the nation down.” If anything, the war itself was pushed along by jealous Northern industrialists who ultimately doomed this country and the entirety of Western Civilization with their moral crusade. Talk about dragging things down.

  67. anon[187] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnPlywood

    That’s not correct. The rate of gun ownership in the United States cannot explain the increase in the suicide rate. Gun ownership may be correlated with suicide rate, but not an increase in the rate itself. Further, the “modest increase” you claim is actually quite large. Please don’t comment on things you don’t understand.

    White, Middle-Age Suicide In America Skyrockets

    White, middle-age suicide spiked 40% in the last 10 years

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/reading-between-the-headlines/201305/white-middle-age-suicide-in-america-skyrockets

    Modest, eh? The obvious difference between the United States and the list of countries you provided is that one set is relatively homogeneous and still dominated by natives while the other is not. AE for the win.

  68. anon[299] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnPlywood

    “Sorry Cloudbuster but gun ownership is correlated with suicide internationally.”

    It is not correlated with an increase in the white American suicide rate since 2000, which you have falsely asserted is “modest.” It is not unless you have a problem understanding basic mathematics. This supports the defeated narrative as changing demographics and subsequent loss of political power does seem to correlated nicely. 2000 was the start of republican difficulties in winning the White House based on civnat appeals. Europe hasn’t seen the same degree of demographic change, Europeans are still supermajorities in their homelands, their politicians still look like them, and they have spent far less on racial integration projects since 1960 compared with the United States.

    “Less than 13% of Sweden’s population is non-European, so the changing demographics of Sweden is not going to alter the suicide rate by much..”

    I think you just answered your own question. Compare Sweden’s demographics and the composition of their politicians with the United States and you’ll have your defeated narrative, which is almost certainly true.

    “The common denominator among Europeans is lower rates of firearm ownership, and a media that strictly controls right wing propaganda.”

    Are you surprised a left-winger turned out to be an authoritarian right out of 1984? Maybe the moral of the story is to realize his side is disingenuous and has a strong totalitarian streak. Maybe we should censor them first before they can oppress us?

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  69. Alfa158 says:
    @anon

    Not that obvious, he is able to keep it pretty straight except for slipping in that last tongue in cheek reference to Der Vaterland. In another comment he also slips in the howler that Watts is turning into an enclave of White people.
    Well, you know the old saying, everybody’s thinks they’re a comedian.

  70. @JohnPlywood

    The total number of homicides in Sweden today is only marginally higher than it was in the 1960s,

    Given that the average ethnic Swede is much older today than in the 1960s, and that trauma treatment has vastly improved, the homicide rate should be much lower. For mysterious reasons, it isn’t.

    Agree with you that in areas where non-blacks ethnically cleanse out blacks, crime rates fall.

  71. Twinkie says:
    @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    They weren’t stupid but they definitely weren’t “geniuses” either. Most of their writings aren’t particularly brilliant and the most insightful parts are generally copied, sometimes verbatim, from earlier philosophers who they drew inspiration from.

    No, they were not geniuses. They were, however, men of wisdom who understood human nature (flawed) and power (corrupting) well. So they designed a brilliant system of government that created many checks and balances, a flexible system that maintained order, yet did not fall prey to the ossification of centralization.

    The US isn’t even 250 years old yet. The French Ancient Regime lasted almost a thousand despite countless invasions and crises. Get back to me ~AD 2400

    Those thousand years did not see the incredible technological progress and movement of peoples the last 250 years witnessed.

    To paraphrase Indiana Jones, it’s not the years a regime survives that speaks to its durability – it’s the mileage.

    Present troubles notwithstanding, there is no other political system under which I’d rather live, no matter what station in life I might hold.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
  72. Twinkie says:
    @JohnPlywood

    Several of the countries ahead of America of your list (Russia, Ukraine, Switzerland, etc) are saturated with firearms…

    It is true that Korea and Japan are ahead of the USA, but those cultures have long had suicidal tendencies going back to the pre-modern era. And they USED to have strong gun cultures.

    Stop making up falsehoods. Korea and Japan have not ever had “strong gun cultures” – the ruling elites in those countries very jealously maintained monopoly on use of force and weaponry. As soon as Toyotomi Hideyoshi achieved supreme power in a civil war, for example, he engaged in the “Great Sword Hunt” to disarm anyone not under his military command. His predecessor Oda Nobunaga enthusiastically took to creating and utilizing firearms units in his army, but he, too, engaged in efforts to disarm the population once he gained power.

    Any suggestion that Japan and Korea had “strong gun cultures” is laughably, ignorantly wrong.

    Guns are not the reason for suicides and any correlations between firearm ownership and suicides is low. Alcohol consumption is far more correlated with suicides than firearms, and the countries with high rates of suicides are invariably those with high rates of alcohol consumption. Within the U.S., whites unsurprisingly have the highest rate of alcohol consumption. “Asians” have the lowest rates of alcohol consumption, but those of Northeast Asian origin (Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans) have very high rates of consumption compared to other Asians along with the higher rates of suicides.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4872616/

    https://academic.oup.com/qjmed/article/99/1/57/1523792

    https://academic.oup.com/alcalc/article/41/5/473/109923

    Stop the trolling and stop taking up the conversations here with made-up assertions.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  73. @dfordoom

    It seems to me that everyone would keep guns as protection for themselves and their family. The hoodlums prowling the streets carry guns and that is where practically all “gun crime” comes from, not law abiding citizens. You have the right and obligation to protect your family and property. Some say “just call the police.” Good luck with that. They will be there later to call in to have the bodies picked up. They are looking out for no.1 and so should you. If an intruder enters my house there is a .357 slug waiting for him. Won’t make any difference how big, powerful or dopped up he is. The effect will be the same. I don’t like to waste cartridges but I would probably plug him again for good measure. No person no problem.

    As far as suicides there are many ways to accomplish this. A gun is just a material implement (although one of my favorites) and many other things can be utilized. Many people commit suicide by car wrecks or jumping from buildings. Should these items be banned also. Most gun crime is due to Jewmerica’s wars for Israel. As Hillary said “the best way we can help Israel is to attack Syria.” Saddam, Gaddafi and their people were also victims of our deployment of fire power for the Israeli thugs. Women, I think usually take pills to commit suicide. That is their choice. Having the protection of a gun (I also think 12 gauge shot guns are nice to have handy) is my choice and yours, lets keep it that way.

  74. botazefa says:
    @dfordoom

    I think that you are suggesting that, generally, gun availability makes impulsive suicide attempts more effective. Fair?

    Does anyone point a gun at their head and think that if they pull the trigger they will live? i don’t think so, but it’s not really possible to verify that.

    I think that people who are seriously considering suicide are in despair, and they succeed in their efforts. Botched suicides seem more like a cry for help.

    Would be good if we had some data to help us get this sorted. Cloudbuster mentioned suicide rates in non-gun countries may help clear things up.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  75. @anon

    That’s not correct. The rate of gun ownership in the United States cannot explain the increase in the suicide rate. Gun ownership may be correlated with suicide rate, but not an increase in the rate itself.

    Look bucko, the study said that gun ownership is correlated with suicide rates internationally. I was responding to someone who said that it wasn’t. They were wrong. Now I’m going to respond to you. Because you’re also wrong.

    Rising gun ownership is a predictor of rising suicide rates:

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24028252/

    Results: Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%.

    From the year 2000 to 2017, the number of guns in American households increased by 51%:

    That very closely matches the predictive model offered by Siegel & colleagues in the above link.

    A “40%” increase in suicides among “middle-aged whites” means the rate increased from 25 per 100,000 to 35 per 100,000. The suicide rate ought to fluctuate modestly as America ages (older people are more likely to commit suicide, especially in a country with shitty healthcare), and you know, increases its gun saturation by 51%.

    This supports the defeated narrative as changing demographics and subsequent loss of political power does seem to correlated nicely. 2000 was the start of republican difficulties in winning the White House based on civnat appeals.

    *Yawn*.

    Said no study, ever. You’re going to have to come at me with something other than your own daydreams when you use the word “correlation”.

    This website seems to be attracting the most infirm and comical personalities on the net, lately. I’m not sure what could be more denigrating to middle-aged white Americans, than the notion that their suicide rate increased 40% because of the the Republican Party’s political performance. The vast majority of people out there are not political nerds/paid party trolls such as yourself.

    I think you just answered your own question. Compare Sweden’s demographics and the composition of their politicians with the United States and you’ll have your defeated narrative, which is almost certainly true

    What a knucklehead. US politicians are disproportionately white.

    https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2017-10-24/despite-diverse-demographics-most-politicians-are-still-white-men

    Despite white men comprising only 31 percent of the population, 97 percent of all Republican elected officials are white and 76 percent are male. Of all Democratic elected officials, 79 percent are white and 65 percent are male, according to the study.

    A factor in the discrepancy, RDC says, is a problem with who runs for office. Of Republican candidates, 73 percent are white men and 23 percent are white women. Men of color make up 3 percent of candidates and women of color make up 1 percent, according to the study

    Am I an authoritarian? You’re damn skippy. The irrational can have no place in shaping our society.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @dfordoom
  76. @Twinkie

    You’re talking about feudal Japan, you flipping trucktard. In early 1900s Japan, gun rights were roughly equivalent to post-1968 USA gun rights. Civilians could own and carry handguns. It was after WW2 during the occupation effort that Japan’s current strict gun control laws were imposed. Before that, Japan had an urban gun culture.

    Guns are not the reason for suicides and any correlations between firearm ownership and suicides is low.

    Plugging your ears and screaming “LALALALALA” might be therapeutic for you, but it doesn’t actually make reality like that.

    https://brady-static.s3.amazonaws.com/Report/Brady-Guns-Suicide-Report-2016.pdf

    The fact is, even more than depression or substance abuse, the strongest predictor of how likely a person is to die from suicide is a gun in the home. Research shows a gun in the home makes a suicide three times more likely.

    https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2019-01-17/youth-suicide-rates-higher-in-states-with-more-gun-ownership

    The SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS that have guns is the single strongest predictor of how many young people commit suicide in a state, a new study shows.

    At the state level, the share of households that owned guns in 2004 was strongly linked to the youth suicide rate over the next decade, researchers found, even after controlling for other factors such as depression, suicide plans and previous suicide attempts.

    Overall, the youth suicide rate rose about 27 percent with each 10 percentage-point increase in household gun ownership, according to the study, published Thursday in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

    Another bad day for Twinkie. Why does he even bother trying to argue with me anymore? He must be a glutton for punishment.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  77. Wency says:
    @Yahya K.

    Observations like this are always interesting. England might have 10-20x the population today that it did in Shakespeare’s time. So where are the 10-20 Shakespeares? For that matter, where is Nebraska’s Shakespeare?

    I was recently reading over Washington’s Farewell Address with a colleague who has a master’s degree and probably a 110-120 IQ, and he couldn’t comprehend what it was saying. And they printed this thing in the newspaper, expecting the common (landowning) man to comprehend it.

    Civilizational decline and decadence are powerful forces.

  78. @anon

    Ain’t that the truth. Let’s all use our forebrains to avoid engaging these people and put energy into more useful things.

  79. Brett says:
    @JohnPlywood

    Fact: Taking guns out of the households in America would reduce the total number of gunshot inflicted deaths more so than deporting every black and Hispanic in America.

    Fact: Nobody kills more people in this country than white male gun owners do.

    On a per capita basis, that’s not even remotely true. You’re playing a silly game where you magnify problems and dismiss problems just because of population disparity.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    , @mark tapley
  80. @Brett

    And not a smidgen of data was offered in support of this emotional appeal.

    Also, the irony:

    On a per capita basis, that’s not even remotely true. You’re playing a silly game where you magnify problems and dismiss problems just because of population disparity.

    Look man, all I ask is that you vape the unleaded gasoline before posting.

  81. @Brett

    Yes , gun crime by whites is about 8 times lower per capita than blacks. Look at where you have the most crime and your going to find most of it is by the blacks. They generally victimize other negroes in predominately black areas but if the Jew driven ANTiFA and BLM movements are not shut down, they will be incentivized to loot murder and rape everywhere.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  82. @Wency

    Colonial America had a very literate population with just local controlled systems and in many cases just a one room school house with one teacher. The founders believed that everyone should be able to read the Bible. By the mid 1800’s we had the most literate population in the world. The elite don’t like the average person to have a high level of comprehension or analytical ability. So Horace Mann and other socialists began to push for “public Schooling” in order to get rid of individualism but instead produce a homogeneous standard product of obedient workers.

    By the turn of the century Un. of Chicago (Rockefeller) educator John Dewey, now known as the “father of Amer. education” and a socialist said that they did not want highly educated people but rather people that would fit into the socialist system.

    The military has been checking literacy and I.Q. for over 100 years now. They are continuing to decrease. There has been a deliberate dumbing down of the public school system and many people that graduate high school in America are only at the 4th or 5th grade level. Many are functionally illiterate.

    When my daughter was working on her phd at Baylor she worked part time for a professor that told her that she hated to get ” athletes in her class because many of them could not read.” Sometimes the elite even fall victim to their own scams. Nelson Rockefeller, son of John D. Jr. had been sent to a new type of undisciplined school by his father. He was functionally illiterate. Many people who have worked for and around Trump say he is on the 4th-5th grade level. See his court deposition before he was placed in office by the Jews. Listen to him speak. The elite wants every possible material advantage over the commoners. Sometimes they become victims of their own schemes.

    • Agree: Mark G.
  83. dfordoom says: • Website
    @botazefa

    I think that you are suggesting that, generally, gun availability makes impulsive suicide attempts more effective. Fair?

    Yes. That’s the big thing. And it also makes planned suicide attempts more effective.

    People kill themselves because they don’t see a way out, but more often than not they’re wrong. That’s the tragedy of suicide. So even if a person makes a well-planned suicide attempt, if the attempt fails the person later realises (sometimes it takes quite a while) that things weren’t as hopeless as they’d thought. I know people who attempted suicide and a few years later they’re incredibly thankful that they failed.

    So it’s not a good thing to have an almost 100% effective suicide method ready to hand.

    Most suicide methods have very high failure rates, which is a good thing. It’s remarkably difficult to kill yourself with pills. Driving into a tree is no guarantee of success – you can do that and walk away unscathed. You can slash your wrists but the odds of survival are high.

    Whether it’s an impulsive attempt or a planned attempt there’s still the chance that if the attempt fails the person’s life will actually get better and they will no longer want to kill themselves. The tragedy of a gun suicide is that the person never gets the chance to find out if those overwhelming problems weren’t so overwhelming after all.

    But trying to have a rational discussion where guns are involved is pretty nearly impossible.

  84. Twinkie says:
    @JohnPlywood

    From the year 2000 to 2017, the number of guns in American households increased by 51%:

    Pure sophistry. The number of guns in a household should not matter at all – does having 5 guns and instead of 2 aid in suicides? Of course not.

    The problem with your faulty argument is that the number of households with guns in America has DECLINED over the years while suicides have declined and then risen again.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/29/american-gun-ownership-is-now-at-a-30-year-low/

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    , @Bill Jones
  85. dfordoom says: • Website
    @JohnPlywood

    This supports the defeated narrative as changing demographics and subsequent loss of political power does seem to correlated nicely. 2000 was the start of republican difficulties in winning the White House based on civnat appeals.

    *Yawn*.

    Said no study, ever. You’re going to have to come at me with something other than your own daydreams when you use the word “correlation”.

    There definitely doesn’t seem to be any actual evidence to support the “white people are killing themselves because they’re a defeated people” theory.

    The problem with pushing such politically motivated narratives is that if there turns out out to be no supporting evidence then those pushing the narrative end up looking foolish or dishonest, or hysterical.

    It’s also ironic that alt-righters mock leftists for choosing feelz over realz but then resort to feelz over realz themselves.

  86. Twinkie says:
    @JohnPlywood

    You’re talking about feudal Japan, you flipping trucktard. In early 1900s Japan, gun rights were roughly equivalent to post-1968 USA gun rights. Civilians could own and carry handguns. It was after WW2 during the occupation effort that Japan’s current strict gun control laws were imposed. Before that, Japan had an urban gun culture.

    Keep digging and doubling down: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/japan.php#History

    Gun control was instituted in Japan soon after guns were introduced there, and the country has a long history of policies that restrict gun possession by members of the general public.

    Guns were introduced to Japan through wakō[1] and Europeans in the mid-sixteenth century.[2] In 1588, the ruler of Japan, Hideyoshi Toyotomi, announced the Sword Hunt, which banned possession of swords and firearms by people who were not soldiers. “The measure had the double advantage from the ruler’s point of view of preventing riots and distinguishing the peasant from the soldier.”[3]

    During the Tokugawa period (1603–1867),[4] gun control was expanded. The Tokugawa Shogunate issued the following regulations and decrees:

    Year Regulation/Decree
    1629:
    The use of guns for the control of pests was permitted upon submission of a written declaration that the gun would be used properly.

    1645:
    The use of guns in Edo (Tokyo) was prohibited except by gun officials.

    1662:
    The possession of guns other than by hunters was prohibited. Hunters were registered and prohibited from renting out guns to others.

    1676:
    Crackdowns on illegal gun possessors would be conducted

    1685:
    Persons who turned in or reported shooters of illegal guns would be rewarded.

    1687:
    Villages without hunters were allowed to rent guns.

    1717:
    Even hunters were prohibited from possessing guns in Edo and its outskirts. Guns could be rented for pest control for limited periods.

    1729:
    The rental conditions imposed in 1717 were tightened: the gun rental period would be for one year, a rental document would have to be submitted annually, and the number of boars and deer taken in the previous year had to be reported.[5]

    The Meiji emperor was restored as head of Japan in 1868, and Japan was transformed from a feudal society into a modern country.[6] In 1872, the Meiji Government promulgated the Gun Control Regulation.[7] Under this regulation, only licensed merchants were allowed to sell guns (excluding military guns). Men who had formerly belonged to the soldier class and had owned military guns were required to report them to the authorities. These guns had to have newly carved numbers. The use of guns was thereafter basically limited to hunters.[8] The regulation, aimed at controlling guns and ammunition and disarming civilians, was intended to prevent “bad people from playing with guns.”[9]

    Moreover, the fraction of the population that was allowed to own guns (basically a few hunters) was tiny.

    Unlike you, I lived in both Japan and South Korea and also hunted in both countries. I am very well-acquainted with the firearms history in both.

    Stop making things up.

    https://brady-static.s3.amazonaws.com/Report/Brady-Guns-Suicide-Report-2016.pdf

    You do realize that debunked study is from a notorious gun control group, right? That’s like getting “data” from BLM about the prevalence of police brutality.

    You have no answer for the fact that some of the most high suicide rate countries – in fact, those with far higher rates than gun-saturated America – are not “awash” in guns and in reality have a long history of tight gun control. Russia, for example, has had high suicide rates for decades – even when ownership of private firearms was close to zero under communism (however, alcohol consumption had remained very high – until very recently).

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  87. @Twinkie

    Declining gun ownership by households nationally, is driven by two things:

    1.) Increased numbers of nonwhites, who are significantly less likely to own firearms than whites, and also declining gun ownership among young people in general.

    2.) The rise of spinsters/single adult females living alone (women are less likely to have guns).

    The number of guns PER CAPITA however, has sharply increased:

    Gun SALES have been booming for years:

    It is white people who are buying all the guns in this country. Whites have dropped 84% to ~60% of the U.S. population, but they have held steady at ~90% of gun owners. The NET gun ownership rate among white people has dramatically increased:

    So yes, nonwhites have driven a national decline in household gun ownership, but gun sales have been booming and it’s middle-aged white people who are buying them.

    This thread is about white people. It’s their guns that are behind the suicides.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  88. @mark tapley

    Hey dummy, when I said white people kill more people than blacks, I was talking about homicide & suicide by gun.

    Add up the tally for white murderers + white suicides by gun. Prepare to be amazed — the number of dead white people in this country could be reduced more dramatically by confiscating guns than by deporting blacks.

    • Replies: @mark tapley
  89. @Twinkie

    Again Twinkie, you are only quoting info about feudal-era Japan. You’re apparently suffering from a serious learning disability, and/or injecting hot methanol directly in to your pupils; because your own source states that after the Meiji restoration, gun cuntrol laws were relaxed, and civilians could purchase handguns:

    https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/japan.php#History

    Though the possession of guns by civilians were heavily regulated, it was possible for civilians to own guns, including handguns. This changed after the Second World War. Under the Allied Occupation, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) disarmed Japanese servicemen and issued several arms control directives in 1945 in order to safeguard against any possible danger that might arise from arms possessed by civilians.[11] In 1946, the Japanese government issued the Imperial Ordinance Concerning the Prohibition of the Possession of Guns and Other Arms, which banned the possession of firearms and swords by private citizens in principle, though the possession of hunting guns and artistic swords was allowed under license.[12]

    As I said, in the early 20th century, Japan had relaxed its gun control laws considerably, and purchasing a handgun there was no more difficult than it is today in many American cities:

    http://davekopel.org/2A/LawRev/Japanese_Gun_Control.htm

    During the early 20th century, the gun controls were slightly relaxed. Tokyo and other major ports were allowed to have five gun shops each, other prefectures, three. Revolver sales were allowed with a police permit, and registration of every transaction were required. Nevertheless, the ownership of revolvers was ‘practically nil’ according to one American observer.[96]

    In the 1920s and 1930s, the military came increasingly to control civilian life. Sonoda explains: ‘The army and the navy were vast organizations with a monopoly on physical violence. There was no force in Japan that could offer any resistance’.[97] The 1930s degenerated into a horrible period of government by assassination, as military factions attempted to destroy each other, and as militarists murdered opponents of war.[98] Despite the strict gun laws, the frequency of assassinations far exceeded anything seen in Europe or North America this century. Even today, assassinations still occur.[99]

    There are still quite a few handguns in Japanese households from the pre-1958 American-imlosed gun control laws. I have come across Miroku revolvers and even a (LOADED) Browning GP 9mm in abandoned homes in Japan when I studied there. I’m 99% certain that these houses weren’t formerly occupied by police officers or Yaks.

    You have no answer for the fact that some of the most high suicide rate countries – in fact, those with far higher rates than gun-saturated America – are not “awash” in guns and in reality have a long history of tight gun control. Russia, for example, has had high suicide rates for decades – even when ownership of private firearms was close to zero under communism (however, alcohol consumption had remained very high – until very recently).

    It’s easy to assume somebody has no answers when you have a learning disability. I already ssid there’s no use in comparing Russia, with its disastrous economy and living standards, to economically successful countries like the USA.

    Nevertheless, Russia has a huge firearms black market and it is arguably as easy to obtain a firearm as it is in the United States, if not easier.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  90. @JohnPlywood

    Murder and suicide are entirely different issues. Suicide is a personal choice. If someone desires to commit suicide then in many cases the accessibility of a gun would make it easier. Just like when I want to go to town, it is easier and more efficient to get there by car than to walk. Guns are just a material implement and can be used for good or evil, just like a knife, a vehicle or the electricity we depend on every day. Guns have been a key to survival in many cases and saved the lives of many. If you choose to not use them that is your business just as it is for those of us who do.

    It is well documented that the negroes in this country commit a disproportionate level of crimes. In many cases having a gun for personal defense has meant the difference between life and death. You need to tone down your rhetoric. Your strident demeaning attitude does not contributed to your message with me or the other people you have lambasted. We don’t need to agree but we do need to be adults.

  91. Twinkie says:
    @JohnPlywood

    Declining gun ownership by households nationally, is driven by two things:

    1.) Increased numbers of nonwhites, who are significantly less likely to own firearms than whites, and also declining gun ownership among young people in general.

    2.) The rise of spinsters/single adult females living alone (women are less likely to have guns).

    It doesn’t matter why the number of households with guns has declined for your argument. The fact is that it has and this doesn’t work with your assertion.

    Moreover, even your “explanations” about the decline are wrong. Female gun ownership, obtaining of concealed carry permits, and hunting participation have increased over the same period. The gun culture in America, as such, has much greater female participation than before.

    What’s actually happened is that the number of gun owners has declined, but what gun owners remain have dramatically increased the number of guns they own. In the past, a greater number of American families owned guns, but each owned only a couple of guns. Now, fewer families own guns, but the families that do own gun do many more.

    None of this works with your assertion that guns are strongly linked to suicides – esp. because this trend has been linear in last several decades while suicides declined in the 1990’s and then rose again after that period.

  92. Twinkie says:
    @JohnPlywood

    Read what you quoted again:

    During the early 20th century, the gun controls were slightly relaxed. Tokyo and other major ports were allowed to have five gun shops each, other prefectures, three. Revolver sales were allowed with a police permit, and registration of every transaction were required. Nevertheless, the ownership of revolvers was ‘practically nil’ according to one American observer.[96]

    So is your assertion now that:

    1. Japan tightly restricted guns until the 1900.
    2. There was a slight relaxation between 1900-1945 when the ownership of guns was “practically nil” (again, only a tiny number of hunters were allowed long guns and a miniscule number of handguns existed in private possession).
    3. Therefore Japan had a “strong gun culture” and an “urban gun culture” that led to high suicides in the 1980s-2020’s.

    Geez. Do you even have any sense of shame? Or do you just keep making things up until you just stop, because the lies are much too ridiculous and comical (as in the other thread about intermarriages in East Asia)?

    There are still quite a few handguns in Japanese households from the pre-1958 American-imlosed gun control laws. I have come across Miroku revolvers and even a (LOADED) Browning GP 9mm in abandoned homes in Japan when I studied there.

    In what fantasy world did this happen? Miroku did not make any revolvers “pre-1958.” Miroku produced revolvers in a very small quantity between 1960’s and 80’s for the Japanese police. Moreover, even during the period of “slight relaxation” of handgun laws, military handguns (e.g. Browning Hi Power or “GP” chambered for the Luger 9mm cartridge) were not allowed in civilian possession.

    The “abandoned homes” bit is a nice touch. What are you going to make up about South Korea’s alleged “strong gun culture” also?

    I already ssid there’s no use in comparing Russia, with its disastrous economy and living standards, to economically successful countries like the USA.

    This sounds awfully like…

    Plugging your ears and screaming “LALALALALA” might be therapeutic for you, but it doesn’t actually make reality like that.

    Except you are wrong about that too. This routine of yours is not therapeutic. It just makes you more deluded.

    Again, stop trolling and taking up the bandwidth here with your inane falsehoods. Everybody has access to a search engine. Stop wasting everyone’s time.

  93. @Twinkie

    The number of households telling far left pollsters about guns in their possession is falling.

    That’s probably about as far as it’s safe to go.

    • Replies: @A123
  94. @Wency

    I was recently reading over Washington’s Farewell Address with a colleague who has a master’s degree and probably a 110-120 IQ, and he couldn’t comprehend what it was saying.

    Everything he’s read in his schooling has been dumbed down to be more “accessable” and avoid “unequal outcomes”.  He has a lack of experience with complex prose.  I suppose this comment, with its short, to-the-point sentences, is yet another example of how things have to be written to get through the declining capabilities of the average reader.

    Compare “Tom Jones” with a modern novel and see just how expectations have fallen.

    • Replies: @mark tapley
  95. @Almost Missouri

    The black suicide rate is less than half the white rate. That obviously doesn’t match the narrative of whites luxuriating in their privilege while blacks suffer the unendurable oppression of constant micro-aggressions.

    It seems suicide just isn’t a “black thing.” Maybe they aren’t culturally or genetically inclined to be self-reflective enough to get suicidal. Or maybe they effectively do commit suicide, but do so by just undertaking riskier and riskier behavior until their own lifestyle choices take them out.

    And what’s up with the Asian rate, which is even lower than blacks. Like blacks, East Asians seem to be less self-reflective and neurotic, and more externally oriented. Is that cultural or genetic?

    There are a lot of HBD mysteries to unravel if anyone is brave enough to do the research.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Twinkie
  96. I suspect the perceived optimal arrangement to be the inverse–Democrats take the Senate, extend their advantage in the House, and Trump squeaks by in a narrow Electoral College victory . . .

    You’re both right. It’s win-win for the uniparty, as it always.

  97. A123 says:
    @Bill Jones

    I would believe that the:

    — Number of households is increasing
    — Percentage of households is slightly down trending

    Using a source that cut off in 2016 was slightly misleading, but likely accidental. Here is a link to a chart that is more current: (1)

    The number of households telling far left pollsters about guns in their possession is falling.

    Given the unlikely extreme shift (51%/1994 to 34%/1999) suspicion about the numbers is warranted. However, the trend 1995-Current looks fairly flat as a %.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/Guns.aspx

  98. @Mr. Rational

    Yes and Washington was embarrassed because he was so far below the intellectual capacity of Madison, Adams, Franklin and others. By putting him as chairman they gave him honor for his long service in the Continental Army and at the same time made it so he did not need to participate in discussions about Locke, Montesquieu or Greek and Roman History.

  99. nebulafox says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    I mentioned earlier that a man’s likeliest to commit suicide if he’s lost something, or if he’s lost out on something, and perceives no way of making up for it adequately. If you are a ghetto youth at the bottom of society, you probably never conceived yourself as being anything else, so there’s no sense of loss to be had. If you are the child of Mexican peasants, you are often living a life with opportunities that you couldn’t have dreamed of back in Mexico, even if you are near the bottom of the American social ladder.

    The people who are most downwardly mobile are “legacy” American males in the middle and working classes, i.e, they’ll be mostly white. And white people are still the majority, stands to reason they’ll be more than half of the suicides, at least, right? I really don’t think it has much to do with race intrinsically so much as the circumstances that the mostly white “Old America” is facing: I think a man of a different race in the same social situation would respond similarly.

    (Gender is a verrrrrrry different story. Men are a lot harder hit by declassment than women. BTW: engaging in mass shootings is similar in my books. Race doesn’t matter, gender very much does.)

  100. nebulafox says:
    @Wency

    People here have a twisted view of IQ. I don’t think many people get how objectively rare it is to have an IQ of 140+: that’s a fraction of a percentile. Even 130 puts you within the top 2.5%. There’s probably a lot of students at top colleges who fall outside that range.

    Having an IQ of 115 means you are in the 15% of Americans, brainpower wise. Even in East Asia, that’s solidly above average. Many Americans out there have graduate degrees, and I wouldn’t put them even close to being in the top 15%. And IQ isn’t sufficient for a good life outcome: it can help, but that’s it. I’ve met waitresses and drunkards who probably have IQs above 140, and a lot of their problems were related to never having anybody to relate to growing up, or anybody in school train and hone their abilities.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    , @Wency
  101. nebulafox says:

    On the gun debate upstream: my experience has been that the most widespread gun culture in Asia is in the least “Asian” Asian country: the Philippines. I don’t know if that’s due to the American influence or not: perhaps partially, but Malays also like to shoot, and when you strip away the massive differences in religion and the degree of Westernization, the culture underneath is quite similar. A lot of the gun ranges in California are owned by Americans of Filipino extraction, to boot.

    I’ve known mainland Chinese programmers who want to learn how to shoot, but since gun range laws in China are very restrictive, they book flights for the PI for getaway weekends instead. There’s also a surprising number of Korean and Japanese expats in the Philippines, either for retirement or as a cheap place for the kids to learn English.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Twinkie
  102. @nebulafox

    I’ve met waitresses and drunkards who probably have IQs above 140, and a lot of their problems were related to never having anybody to relate to growing up, or anybody in school train and hone their abilities.

    This is a point I’ve made with a friend.  Children growing up with IQs 2SD or more above the mean don’t have a meatspace peer group unless their personal circumstances are very unusual (e.g. growing up in a university town where the parents set up opportunities to socialize).  If they go to public school they may not have a single intellectual peer in their entire school, let alone their classes.  The only opportunity they have to interact with actual peers is on-line, and there are serious limits on how much you can do that way.

    It would be a serious boon for the country as a whole if there was an effort to bring families with such children together in a designated city or cities, centered around a university to provide the intellectual heft that true education requires.  There aren’t that many such children and their parents are generally productive, so relocating them would be largely self-financing.  Of course the “optics” would be horrible and “inequalities” would be exacerbated, so the SJWs would hate it.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Talha
  103. nebulafox says:
    @Mr. Rational

    If there’s a major IQ gap between you and your parents, there could be an issue of awareness in cultures that don’t prioritize education. The Chinese educational model has very, very steep drawbacks, but you don’t see kids in rural China who are noticeably much brighter than their parents or their community at large slipping through the cracks as much as I’ve seen it happen in the US.

    I also think there’s a huge geographic component to this. A poor but smart kid in NYC can fight into a school like Bronx Science or Stuy. (Or at least it used to be that way: the current wave of wokeism in admissions is going to be really rough on the kind of kid-usually Asian-who fits this description.) White kids in flyover country don’t have that option, and if you aren’t careful, they can slip through the cracks pretty easily. There are special schools out there, often connected to universities, but not everybody has the means to access them, or even knows they exist until it is too late.

    However, as I mentioned, people overestimate how common IQs like that are, and while some people from that background do slip through the cracks, many others do not, even if they’ve got to take a longer route to upward mobility than they would otherwise. We’ve more got the opposite problem of a bloated upper-middle class fighting as hard as they can to make sure their intellectually unexceptional kids don’t experience downward mobility, and you can’t really blame the parents, considering how we’ve basically created a society of the Saved and the Damned.

    • Agree: Twinkie, iffen
  104. Talha says:
    @Mr. Rational

    If they go to public school they may not have a single intellectual peer in their entire school, let alone their classes.

    Many districts have something akin to the California GATE program. They spot and test kids that are in the upper 2 percentile or so and put them in a supplemental peer group that gets extra challenging work. Sometimes they split them off into a completely separate class and sometimes, they will bus these “gifted” kids from various schools to the one school in district that has the resources for the program.

    My youngest son is in one of these (by the grace of God) and good school districts actually seek these kids out.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  105. Twinkie says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    And what’s up with the Asian rate, which is even lower than blacks. Like blacks, East Asians seem to be less self-reflective and neurotic, and more externally oriented. Is that cultural or genetic?

    East Asians in East Asia have high suicide rates. South Korea has the highest in the industrialized world. Does that mean East Asians are more “self-reflective” than whites?

    Also note that Western European suicide rates are very low (Slavic rates tend to be very high, esp. the Russians and their ethnic kins).

    There are a lot of HBD mysteries to unravel if anyone is brave enough to do the research.

    It helps to not assign the best possible explanations for one’s own race and not twist into the others the worst possible rationales if one wants to unravel the said mysteries.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  106. Twinkie says:
    @nebulafox

    There are “shooting” vacations to the Philippines organized for curious Japanese tourists.

    Also, did you know that there used to be a shooting range in the basement of the Lotte World theme park in Seoul? Obviously it provided its own guns (since most civilians can’t own guns in Korea), and caterEd to Japanese tourists. The pistols were mounted on hanging cables so that they couldn’t be turned around. I don’t know if it’s still there.

    https://jpgamboa.com/lotte-world-shooting-range/

  107. nebulafox says:
    @Twinkie

    > South Korea has the highest in the industrialized world… Slavic rates tend to be very high, esp. the Russians and their ethnic kins.

    Alcohol.

    >Also, did you know that there used to be a shooting range in the basement of the Lotte World theme park in Seoul?

    No, I had no idea. I couldn’t handle the noise from guns as a kid. It’s only been in the last few years that I’ve developed the willingness to learn how to shoot. The last time I was in Korea, I didn’t have the kind of money to engage in fun stuff that wasn’t free anyhow. (Yay, mountain treks!)

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  108. nebulafox says:
    @Yahya K.

    >A tiny city too. How large would the population of a desert city have been back then? 5,000 people?

    A lot of the early Muslims spent came from, or spent much of their time further north, though. It’d be a mistake to think of them all as traditional Bedouin. Many of the early Rashidun soldiers were probably former foedorati for Heraclius who were angry at being stiffed right at a moment of moral and emotional dislocation in the wake of the ancient world’s version of WWII.

    What happened with the Arabs wasn’t that dissimilar from their German counterparts in the West, and what would happen with the Turks centuries later: centuries of trade with Rome had lead to the formation of more sophisticated political arrangements and the acceptance of monotheistic beliefs. Arabs were a common sight in the Roman East: they owned land, they became citizens, they served in the army, and even became emperors. The Umayyads, as one example, were wealthy from their land-holdings in then Roman Syria. Makes a lot of sense that they’d base themselves in Damascus.

    Part of the reason why Islam went to India and Indonesia instead of Europe is because the Abbasids were a civilian dynasty who lacked the emotional and economic ties to Constantinople that the old Syro-Arab conquest elites did. The move from Damascus to Baghdad and the incorporation of traditional Persian (they played the “Greek” role to the “Latin” Arabs, if we want to take Rome as a comparison) imperial methods of rule symbolized this.

    • Replies: @Talha
  109. @Talha

    Many districts have something akin to the California GATE program. They spot and test kids that are in the upper 2 percentile or so and put them in a supplemental peer group that gets extra challenging work.

    I had the misfortune to go to elementary school under a principal who made a point of putting the 4 brightest boys in my year in different classrooms.  We knew each other outside of class but had no companionship when it mattered.

    Evil fucking bitch.

    • Replies: @Talha
  110. Twinkie says:
    @nebulafox

    Alcohol.

    Yup, as I mentioned in several comments. How odd! Abuse of a known depressant increases suicides!

    The recent lockdowns and quarantines in America have accompanied increased overdoses of narcotics and suicides. But, no, it’s not the depressive effects of social isolation according to our resident genius here. It’s the guns! Because people are buying more guns!

    The last time I was in Korea, I didn’t have the kind of money to engage in fun stuff that wasn’t free anyhow. (Yay, mountain treks!)

    The shooting ranges in Korea are more a curiosity (and quite pricey). Much better and cheaper shooting in America. Really, if you are a visitor, there are better things to do with your limited time in Korea.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  111. Talha says:
    @Mr. Rational

    That sucks. A lot of this does depend on the attitude of the local administration.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  112. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Twinkie

    The recent lockdowns and quarantines in America have accompanied increased overdoses of narcotics and suicides. But, no, it’s not the depressive effects of social isolation according to our resident genius here. It’s the guns! Because people are buying more guns!

    Because when people are suffering the effects of depression and social isolation and they’re abusing alcohol and narcotics it’s such a good idea to have lots of guns ready to hand. I bow to your superior genius.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  113. Twinkie says:
    @dfordoom

    What makes you think that it’s the people with legal guns who are abusing alcohol and narcotics?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  114. Talha says:
    @nebulafox

    It’d be a mistake to think of them all as traditional Bedouin.

    This is right. The city of Makkah, like other cities like Madinah, Ta’if, etc. were

    Many of the early Rashidun soldiers were probably former foedorati for Heraclius

    There was some of this – plenty of Arab tribes (even Christian ones) switched sides, but the biggest core came from places like Yemen and the Hijaz and other areas of Arabia proper. This can be ascertained by the migration of the tribes (like the Qahtani sub-divisions) across everything from the Levant to Persia to North Africa and some even end up in Andalusia. Islamic history gives quite a bit of credit to the Yemenis (who then go on and spread Islam across the Indian Ocean trade networks as well).

    a moment of moral and emotional dislocation in the wake of the ancient world’s version of WWII.

    Not a bad analogy – the Persian/Greek wars were quite destructive.

    Makes a lot of sense that they’d base themselves in Damascus.

    This was also due to the initial split and civil war between the Ummayyads and the Muslims that supported leaders from Ahl ul-Bayt (ra) and others (this is the Hijaz and Persian lands). The base of Ummayyad power came out of Egypt and Syria, they were generally disliked elsewhere and had to brutally put down a series of revolts across Arabia and what is now Iraq and Iran. In the end, the Syrian/Egypt combination proved to be a very powerful military-political bloc in the region; which is why Fatimids, Ayyubids, Mamluks and others used it as their core constituency.

    Part of the reason why Islam went to India and Indonesia instead of Europe is because the Abbasids were a civilian dynasty who lacked the emotional and economic ties to Constantinople that the old Syro-Arab conquest elites did.

    Definitely part of it – another part is that Europe was simply more difficult to get to for major invasions (which had to be mostly naval assaults) and – militarily – they were better defenders as compared to India.

    The move from Damascus to Baghdad and the incorporation of traditional Persian (they played the “Greek” role to the “Latin” Arabs, if we want to take Rome as a comparison) imperial methods of rule symbolized this.

    The Abbasid revolt was – underneath the surface – a kind of “Persian Empire Strikes Back” sequel.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @nebulafox
  115. @Talha

    At least she’s dead (of natural causes, which is better than she deserved).  I have not yet made the effort to find her grave so I can piss on it.

  116. Talha says:
    @Talha

    **The city of Makkah, like other cities like Madinah, Ta’if, etc. were** settled towns that had everything from defensive walls to date gardens to vineyards to busy markets. But the town and buiding capabilities of the Arabs at the time would not allow for anything like a “bustling metropolis”.

    I have heard from very knowledgeable people that the entire city of Madinah had a footprint smaller than the current Masjid an-Nabawi that sits in the middle of town.

    It is unfortunate that the much of the older archaeological locations (like the houses of various Companions [ra]) were basically wiped out by the Wahhabi-influenced government, but there are enough recorded history to make models on what the original towns may have looked like. See below.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    Shaykh Hamza Yusuf introduces this New Amazing App

    Shaykh Hamza Yusuf introduces this New Amazing App: Download this amazing app called Hislo for historical places of Makkah & Madinah. Some Amazing Trips in 2019: 1) Last 10 Nights in Ramadan in Masjid Aqsa 2) Umrah 2019 with Shaykh Zahir Mahmood in Easter April 20193) Istanbul in March 2019 with Ustadha Yasmin Mogahed (USA) Visit http://www.alburujpress.com for more info and to enrol!

    Posted by Al Buruj Press on Thursday, November 29, 2018

  117. Wency says:
    @nebulafox

    I think it can be easy to overestimate IQ, but also easy to underestimate it, if you live in a bubble without much interaction with hoi polloi.

    I recalled The Bell Curve putting the average IQ of college grads a bit higher than 110. Maybe that’s wrong, but it’s the assumption I’m operating from. The quality of the average college grad has probably decreased since that book was published in the 90s, but not really, I don’t think, if you hold race and alma mater constant.

    Having a master’s, even in basket-weaving, probably selects for slightly higher IQ, since it’s an indicator that you didn’t really struggle in school. Yes, it can also be an indicator that you’re obsequious, obsessed with credentials, afraid of the real-world, etc., but I would guess that there are a lot more college grads who skip grad school because they’re too stupid than who skip it because they’re too smart.

  118. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Twinkie

    What makes you think that it’s the people with legal guns who are abusing alcohol and narcotics?

    Why would they somehow be immune from the fact0rs that lead other people to abuse alcohol and narcotics?

    Why don’t gun enthusiasts just be honest? Say that they think that guns are essential to preserve freedom but admit that everything has a price. The price of mass gun ownership is a higher rate of successful suicides.

    Then there could be a rational debate about whether the price is worth paying.

    Maybe there could also be a rational debate about whether guns actually do help to preserve freedom. The evidence of the past half century or so suggests that they don’t help, but maybe gun enthusiasts could come up with some actual evidence that countries with lots of guns in private hands really are freer than other countries. Or some actual evidence that all those guns have prevented the loss of freedoms.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @Yahya K.
    , @nebulafox
  119. Yahya K. says:
    @dfordoom

    Maybe there could also be a rational debate about whether guns actually do help to preserve freedom. The evidence of the past half century or so suggests that they don’t help, but maybe gun enthusiasts could come up with some actual evidence that countries with lots of guns in private hands really are freer than other countries. Or some actual evidence that all those guns have prevented the loss of freedoms.

    There’s a nice per capita gun ownership graph on Wikipedia:

    (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country)

    Some observations:

    1) The US, unsurprisingly, is at the top of the list. (USA! USA! USA!). Canada, somewhat surprisingly, is #7 on the list. There are a few other surprising ones in there as well. Socialist Western Europe is pretty high up on the list. (Finland is #10, Iceland #12, Austria #14, Norway #17, Switzerland #19, Sweden #22, France #26, Germany #28). Most of the top 30 countries on the list can be considered “free nations”.

    2) On the other hand, free countries can also be found on the low-end of the list. Spain is #103, Israel #108, Estonia #122, England #127, Netherlands #162, Poland #166, Japan #219, South Korea #224. So there is no clear correlation there.

    3) Yemen is #3 on the list. They are currently in open rebellion against their government. I’m sure private gun ownership helped with that. I’m not sure this is transferable to advanced nations though. The Yemeni’s can put up a fight against their poorly-equipped governments with Ak-47s. Can Americans fight against this though:

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  120. nebulafox says:
    @dfordoom

    >Why would they somehow be immune from the fact0rs that lead other people to abuse alcohol and narcotics?

    As someone who has actually experienced addiction, unless most commentators here, I can confidently state that most actual, no-kidding addicts out there do not have the money, patience, or presentation to legally purchase guns. Similarly, suicidal people are going to find ways to off themselves if they really have their minds made up.

    There’s a reason that good drug dealers never take the stuff themselves.

    >Maybe there could also be a rational debate about whether guns actually do help to preserve freedom. The evidence of the past half century or so suggests that they don’t help, but maybe gun enthusiasts could come up with some actual evidence that countries with lots of guns in private hands really are freer than other countries.

    I really think gun ownership is agnostic to notions of “freedom”. Switzerland is no worse than Canada, and the Philippines is not a more pleasant place to live than Japan.

    In the US, it depends on the location. If we’re talking an inner city that looks like a war zone, yeah, guns aren’t helping preserve freedom, because there’s no real freedom when you fear for your life standing on the corner. The argument that the market is swamped with illegal guns so there’s no point in doing anything is the right-wing equivalent to arguing that we should deport no illegal immigrants because we can’t possibly hope to deport 11 million.

    (Somehow, though, I don’t think the Democrats envision “young underclass black male” as The Bad Guy when ranting about the 2nd Amendment. Mass shootings get all the press, but they aren’t most homicides. This can get a bit awkward if we devolve the issue and places where guns aren’t helping-aka, inner cities-enact anti-gun laws while rural America continues on as normal.)

    The US is a huge place, and what makes sense in one locality might not make sense in the other. Personally, I’m cool with it if Chicago or New York wants to ban guns within city limits: I’ll respect the law and not bring a gun into Chicago or New York. But what if you live in rural Texas, where the nearest help might be 40 miles away, where people teach their children early on how to use them responsibly and legally, and the high rate of gun usage might be keeping crime down rather than the other way around?

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  121. nebulafox says:
    @Talha

    >Not a bad analogy – the Persian/Greek wars were quite destructive.

    Romans. 😉 A century of conflict on the heels of bubonic plague, environment shifts, and famine. Not fun times.

    Funnily enough, to the Muslim World, they’d always be the Romans, long after the West stopped thinking of them as such. Even after the Ottoman takeover, Greek-speakers were referred to in the millet system as Romans.

    >The base of Ummayyad power came out of Egypt and Syria, they were generally disliked elsewhere and had to brutally put down a series of revolts across Arabia and what is now Iraq and Iran. In the end, the Syrian/Egypt combination proved to be a very powerful military-political bloc in the region; which is why Fatimids, Ayyubids, Mamluks and others used it as their core constituency.

    Mu’awiyah and al-Malik had power because the Syrian army was the best fighting force in the caliphate (it was based off merit, not tribal connections), not because of religious arguments or traditional legitimacy. This worked until it didn’t. Always thought the successor states were more reliant off of imported Turkish slave soldiers instead, though?

    >Definitely part of it – another part is that Europe was simply more difficult to get to for major invasions (which had to be mostly naval assaults) and – militarily – they were better defenders as compared to India.

    Navies were expensive in the ancient world. It was also a straightfoward cost/benefit calculation: why would you waste your time dickering with the inveterately warlike, impoverished collapsed civilization in Europe when you could be making a killing to the east? Jihad against Constantinople resumed, but with the intention of extracting tribute rather than outright conquest. And when the caliphate disintegrated into its constituent parts in the 10th Century, further conversion was initiated by individual political leaders or independent traders, so economics became even more vital of a consideration. Human beings be human beings.

    The Umayyads initially had an interest in northern expansion into the realm of the Franks, but after the downfall of the dynasty, they didn’t have the resources to penetrate beyond the Pyrenees. Their relationship with Baghdad was so bad (that happens when your family was hunted down by death squads) that Constantinople tried to enlist them along with the Franks in a broad coalition against the caliphate. Theophilus died before this could take off, but it’s interesting to already see the multipolar politics for which Byzantium would become famous already emerging that early on.

  122. nebulafox says:
    @nebulafox

    PS:

    Unrelated, but a pet peeve of mine is overuse of the word “addict”. Regularly abusing a substance-even heavily-is not the same thing as being an addict. This is especially common with alcohol. Addiction requires an actual neurological shift: you get physically dependent on it, or you end up doing something even when you really, genuinely don’t want to. It does change your personality.

    The key issue is control, not volume.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  123. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nebulafox

    Similarly, suicidal people are going to find ways to off themselves if they really have their minds made up.

    Yes, but the crucial point is that if they use a gun they will almost certainly succeed in killing themselves. If they use pills they will almost certainly fail. What matters is not how many people attempt suicide, but how many succeed.

    If you attempt suicide and fail you get a second chance at life. Guns don’t give you that second chance.

  124. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nebulafox

    The US is a huge place, and what makes sense in one locality might not make sense in the other. Personally, I’m cool with it if Chicago or New York wants to ban guns within city limits: I’ll respect the law and not bring a gun into Chicago or New York. But what if you live in rural Texas, where the nearest help might be 40 miles away, where people teach their children early on how to use them responsibly and legally, and the high rate of gun usage might be keeping crime down rather than the other way around?

    I have no strong views on gun ownership. I’ve merely pointed out that if guns are freely available you’ll have a higher rate of successful suicides. Maybe that’s a price worth paying, but I think gun enthusiasts should be honest enough to admit that there is a price to be paid. That price will be paid in human lives.

    As for gun rights and freedom, if you want to argue that people have some innate human right to own guns then you’re free to do so. I’m just not convinced that gun ownership is going to help you to preserve political and legal freedoms. I think that the claim that guns preserve freedom is a dubious unproven assertion.

    If every gun owner was sane and sensible and responsible and mentally stable legal guns wouldn’t be a problem. But the only way to ensure that legal guns can only be owned by sane, sensible, responsible and mentally stable people would seem to be to restrict gun ownership. I don’t see a way out of that.

    I think it’s an issue that requires calm reasoned discussion (and your comments certain qualify as calm and reasoned). In general I don’t see much hope for such a calm reasoned discussion, but then I don’t see much hope for calm reasoned discussions on any issue these days.

    • Replies: @anon
  125. @dfordoom

    IIRC, you were the first person I saw articulate this ‘dream’ scenario, so thanks for that.

  126. @botazefa

    Indeed, and freedom requires isonomy.

    • Replies: @botazefa
  127. botazefa says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    Isonomy – I had to look that one up. Always learning.

    Thanks!

  128. anon[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    I have no strong views on gun ownership.

    Lol, sure, that’s totally obvious from your completely even-handed comments over the years.

    I’ve merely pointed out assumed with no factual basis that if guns are freely available you’ll have a higher rate of successful suicides.

    Fixed your incorrect sentence.

    Challenge: Please post the rate of legal gun ownership in South Korea and Japan. Then post the suicide rates per 100,000 for the same countries.

    Then explain. Use facts, not handwaving and assumptions.

    Prediction: He won’t even try.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS