I went through the INS review with my (legitimate) foreign born wife. It was a formality for us, obviously well-to-do professionals, my wife from a Euro country, etc.

I asked the examiner what percentages of marriages that the INS sees does she think are fake/arranged/insincere.

She very brightly/cheerfully responded, “Oh, about 80%”, which floored me. And mind you, this was in 1991.

She also said this like it was a common assumption among her peers, not some personal agenda of hers.

Something is wrong with a process where 80% of the applicants are still fraudulent/invalid at this late and high cost stage of the process (human interview). I’m certain far fewer than 80% are rejected at this stage.

“In a stationary population (constant age-specific death rates and annual deaths = annual births) the crude birth rate and death rate are equal to the inverse of the expectation of life at birth. (I thought this was really cool when I first saw it derived.)”

Isn’t this essentially the definition of a stable population stated arithmetically (can’t even grace it with the term “mathematically”, that might make this observation by Jus’ Sayin’ sound intelligent/clever then).

I had a rule of thumb for converting pistol and rifle calibers given in metric to Standard–multiply by four.

5.56 mm = .22 caliber
6.35 mm = .25 caiber
7.62 mm = .30 caliber
9 mm = .36 caliber (what we call .38 is really .357 or .36)

Lots better is simply remembering 1 inch ~ 2.5 centimeters (or its inverse, 1 cm = .4 inches, hence your factor of four above)

Another related one is 1 meter ~ 3 feet, but if you need a little more accuracy, 1 meter ~ 3.1 feet.

p.s. “~” is a better symbol for expressing approximations than “=”.

Poll: Americans support Trump’s Muslim migration ban by a 50-46 margin.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/dems-like-a-muslim-ban-much-more-when-its-not-trumps-idea/article/2578766

Considering that the majority of Americans support the proposal, it’s amazing how hysterical the reaction has been from the media and political establishment.

You know you are on target when you are catching flak.

Isn’t this simply a variant of the old, “Despite record low crime rates, prisons are bursting at the seams” type of idiocy?

I was stationed at Camp Lejeune, NC in the late 70s. I’m 100% positive the only Mexicans (or any other Hispanics) I ever encountered there were fellow Marines.

Stereotype threat always struck me as one of the more fanciful Just So stories. Who could ever believe something like that? Probably people who also use it console themselves about their own deficient performances on intelligence tests.

I guess I’m a climate skeptic. I’ve always thought it was a pseudo science given the absolute dearth of people with any real/quantitative background in heat transfer/fluid flow. From what I can tell, it is a bunch of soft science folks running around with excel spreadsheets and making “hand waving” arguments.

FWIW, I have extensive experience in heat transfer/fluid dynamics, both professionally and academically.

I don’t like to argue with religious people, so I don’t usually even discuss things with believers. However, on the occasion it arises, I usually explain it like this:

Heat transfer/fluid flow problems, and in general any chaotic system, are highly non-linear. That is, even minor changes in coefficients, assumptions, not only can, but quite often will make extremely large differences in outcomes.

So when your models aren’t yielding desired outcomes, one often reassesses one’s inputs to see if they can be adjusted to produce the desired outcomes. The entire field of climate science is populated by researchers who are looking for desired results, this is undeniable even to climate change (or whatever they call it these days) believers. Thus, even with the best intentions, the results in climate science are always going to skew to the desired result.

In other words, global warming as a prediction is always going to get the call by researchers when resolving ambiguities, gray areas, estimations, etc. Actually, given the dynamics of the situation, it is impossible for it to work otherwise. It is inherently biased and only in very hard math/science can a lone voice occasionally prevail.

First question to any purported climate scientist should be how much have they ever worked with Navier Stokes equations. Or maybe, if they have ever even heard of them.

Maybe then might ask them about that assumption of constant energy input from that big ball of hydrogen fusion up in the sky. That is an unsupportable assumption simply by itself. But an interesting question would be:

Assume there is no greenhouse effect and the entire predicted/claimed recent global warming was simply due to the sun. How much would the sun have to increase its energy output to be the cause of this trend (ps – remember heat transfer/fluid flow problems are often highly non-linear, so there is a very real possibility the answer is ‘Not very much at all, maybe even not a detectable amount’. Do we even have any way of detecting that amount of increased energy from the sun? Do we claim to fully understand all the means by which energy is transferred from the sun to the earth via the manifold types of radiation emanating from it?

I honestly don’t know the answer(s) to these questions and, again, I have very significant background in physics, heat transfer, etc. What tells me this is not real science is the fact that I don’t see anyone in the field asking these questions and understanding the driving function – in climate, it is the sun ultimately – in any problem is among the first questions to ask and to continue to review as one models, etc.

Sometimes a believer then asks why don’t guys like me come forward with these criticisms. I respond that they are all sensible people like me who have no wish to be “The Worst Person In The World” for a week or so on the internet. Even believers get that.

The snopes debunking is done by westerners or at least people who don’t really understand how Japan operates. When you have a culturally/ethnically homogeneous society with an average IQ of 105, you really don’t have to write everything down in lawyerly detail.

So a lot of policy manifests that isn’t written in some law/manual. For instance, I highly doubt there is any written guideline that tells airport security to search/extensively question arabic/muslim looking people. However, it has happened to every about every muslim/arab looking people every time I’ve been in a Japanese airport, which is many more times than I can count.

Similarly, many landlords won’t rent to foreigners – this is legal, they don’t have civil rights laws – much less muslims. I would agree that muslim-appearing people are probably facing an uphill battle with landlords.

Similarly for immigration – you can bet there is no question about religion on the forms and the Japanese immigration bureau would say they are neutral on the issue. That is because Japan learned a long time ago that what are common assumptions in Japan can cause huge clutching of pearls abroad. But you can bet your bottom yen that the immigration bureaucrats (and Japan is run by its bureaucrats) aren’t very keen on some muslim applicant sitting in front of them.

So all the stuff is constructively true to at least some degree. Unless you’ve spent a whole bunch of time in Japan, one really can’t understand how pervasive and guiding the collective conscious is in Japan. All kinds of stuff happens that isn’t written/verbalized and so forth. But yeah, it is true that none of that stuff is on the books or even directed from somewhere, just 100m+ people with very similar backgrounds making very similar decisions.

I live in a hi-rise and I’m certain our landlord would not rent to a muslim because he’d be worried that it would make other renters uncomfortable. And he would be right, and, in Japan, he would be within his rights. And all the other renters would be counting on him to make this decision.

Debito Arudou quite publicly spent years tilting at these windmills, trying to pull the sorts of levers one pulls in western societies, but Japan just about always wins.

I worked at a Japanese university for three years. Having a Japanese supervisor is pure misery. They can be very critical of those below them and with colleagues outside their department they can be savage.

That is the part of Japan that is hidden behind all the politesse, etc. It is a hugely top down society and just like aboriginal’s first thought upon encountering a stranger is whether they have to kill him or not, the first instinct of Japanese is where they rank relative to you. That is (one reason) why foreigners are frequently asked their age in very casual/incidental encounters with Japanese, it helps them get a fix on where you/he relate in the social hierarchy.

Japanese bosses are famously a terror and a strongman like Trump would fit right in, although like most westerners, he talks too much for Japanese tastes. But again, there is the rest of the story. Despite all the bloviation about how awful Trump is, and all the drama of his life, it is striking that, so far, nobody from his family, ex wives, girlfriends, employees, business dealings, has much to say bad about him. I’m surmising that is because despite his bluster, he extends loyalty downward. And Japanese bosses are expected to follow this model. Doesn’t always happen, but it is the cultural expectation, far more than in the U.S. which abandoned paternalism a long time ago.

Here is a slice ‘o life from Japan. I’m think I the only “visible foreigner” in my neighborhood, at least for a few blocks. One day, my wife was walking past the local koban – police box – and heard one of cops milling around outside say to another, “She’s married to the foreigner”. This isn’t in Mayberryama ( the “inaka” in the parlance), but Osaka.

The western reflex would be to see this as prejudice, etc. But my wife and I both just viewed it as normal police work, “noticing things”. That being said, I don’t delude myself and think I fit in Japanese society as anything other than a curiosity. And yeah, some Japanese probably hate me and my gaijinness, but I can hardly expect every single person in a nation of 100m+ to like me. I also get a terrific amount of liberty in Japan, the gaijin card as it were, because everyone knows that only a Japanese can understand all the rules – this even applies to Japanese professionals (and especially their children) after returning from a long posting abroad. The “children of returning overseas Japanese” receive AA-like preference on school admissions/tests and so forth.

Which doctors “hand out opioids like candy ” ? Chronic pain is criminally under treated in the US. Trying to get pain meds when you suffer from debilitating pain is next to impossible.

I had major surgery last summer and I expected that I would be begging for painkillers as I had heard about pain being undertreated in the U.S. for many years now. However, I was surprised, my Dr. was completely free with the juice, swapped the tylenol spiked stuff for the pure oxycodone/oxycontin when I complained a tiny bit and seemed completely willing to prescribe me as much as I wanted.

I actually started/completed the process of weaning myself off the stuff on my own initiative – my Dr, who happens to be a very accomplished/respected, I’d say world class, surgeon, not some sleazy import in the hinterlands, gave me no pushback whatsoever or any urging to limit myself, etc. I had the impression I could have gone on for months refilling prescriptions, but gawd, that oxycodone stuff just does a number on you if you are at all tuned in on your body.

My (anecdotal) experience, which was 180 degrees at odds with my expectation, caused me to do a little more reading on the subject and my opinion is that undertreatment of pain was indeed an issue in the past, but Drs. and the whole medical (and regulatory) apparatus has now caved to big pharma. I think the Drs. & regulators have been beaten over the head for years now about undertreatment of pain and are very sensitive to patients making this accusation like maybe employers are now about accusations of racism. I didn’t even hint at this, but it was my sense of the situation. Obviously only one data point, though, so ymmv.

Peak physics was a couple of generations ago, when things like lasers, rockets, nuclear fission/fusion, etc, were coming on stream. Since the end of the Cold War at latest, it has become irrelevant and a boondoggle. Without the gov. welfare, it would revert back to the tweedy pastime it was prior to 1920s/30s and is slowly getting there anyhow. Current crop of physicists are time-servers and really generally useless pussies.

My undergrad is physics and this was clear to me decades ago, the whole field has been coasting on its laurels since forever.

All the nonsense that we have now is a sort of fruit of the end of the Cold War – we are no longer fighting for our survival (we think) so we can afford to take science off onto tangents.

Exactly – the same reason Suzy can dress up and play submariner or Marine grunt, those things don’t really matter now and consequently safe/unimportant enough for the ladies to amuse themselves with.

Having the perspective of a few decades now, it is very striking how much society changed after the Cold War – Tailhook inquisition, paleocon purge, etc was just a taste of things to come.

It is an utter travesty that Merkel is anywhere other than in prison or a prison grave after execution.

I understand the strategic reasons why Bush I chose conciliation after the end of the Cold War, but now we have to suffer from the consequences of not having a purge, call to account, etc, for every Communist Party member like we are still doing with just about every ex-Nazi (or even simply late war non-German SS draftee/flunky).

As usual, the Rs thought they were being gracious, genteel, unlike the unwashed left and got played as usual – winning the Cold War, probably about the only significant right wing accomplishment in, I dunno, a century maybe, has been completely flushed down the memory hole. The narrative has it due to the beneficence of crypto/premature SJW Gorbachev at best or simply fated to happen as an natural phenomenon if anyone remembers it at all. Certainly Reagan and the right had nothing to do with it and former commies were all just happy innocents in the sway of an innocuous system whose only identifiable fault was their shoddy consumer goods.

Really – end of the Cold War just mean better shopping for those behind the Iron Curtain.

Physics majors tend to be like English majors, politically.

Yes, they and the math majors (I was physics) tend to gravitate towards the avant garde despite their nerdiness. Engineering students, at least traditionally, have tended to be far more conservative IME.

There’s a lot more to physics than particle physics aka high energy physics. Condensed matter physics, a generalization of what used to be called solid state physics, is really hot (well, lots of it is really cold – as in barely above absolute zero – but you know what I mean).

This may be true, but it still doesn’t change the fact that physics is no longer Big Physics and has lost the imagination of the public. When it had it it was a field of demonstrably high and immediate consequences for, well, everyone and everything.

I have a degree in physics and haven’t had the slightest interest in any physics breakthrough since my undergrad days. And that isn’t sour grapes, I was very capable, top student and all, sought after for grad work, etc. But even back then, I felt the glory days had passed for the field, at least in my lifetime, and went to other (highly technical) things that seemed a lot more relevant.

The best thing about having a physics degree is everyone else invariably thinks you are the smartest guy in the room providing you are the only one there with such a thing. This actually has consistently worked to my advantage over the decades and for that reason alone I could easily recommend a young person pursuing a physics degree. Undergraduate is enough – I have a insanely propellor-headed grad degree that required a lot more mental horsepower, but the undegrad physics degree is what people always notice and defer to me as more being more intelligent than them.

Really, it gives people a face-saving out, naturally anonguy is smart, he has a physics degree. Not that it makes him right, but conceding smart is a long way to conceding right.

This thread is a case in point. Would anyone be paying the signatories the slightest heed if it were a petition signed by chemists? And many commenters seems to be relieved that many/most signatories aren’t really legitimate physicists rather than saying who gives a rat’s patoot about physicists.

Fundmentally however, it was not this or that physicist (or which ethnicity they belonged to) who permitted the US to build the bomb. It was the vast resources that the US could bring to bear on the problem.

Exactly. Figuring out uranium enrichment at Oak Ridge, Tenn was at least as important as anything that happened in Nevada. And the theoretical basis of the bomb was understood before the war. It was engineering after that. Tons of it, but basically engineering.

Read up on Leo Szilard. He actually had a patent on nuclear fission in the 1930s.

On the other hand, the thought of an incompetent physicist in the management of a nuclear power plant is fairly terrifying.

The thought of a competent physicist in the management of a nuke power plant isn’t much more comforting. Nuclear power plants are run by operators who make their way up the ranks and recieve specialized training on, naturally, how to run a nuclear power plant. Typically, there is a bunch of nuclear engineering in the training in addition to straight operational stuff with enough physics theory to provide background.

Traditionally, lots of guys come out of USN programs. Physics helps with some of the material, engineering degrees help with other portions. And other things come into play.

I knew two guys with physics degrees who washed from Navy nuke training, one from Princeton, one from Duke, so they weren’t slouches intellectually. But managing a nuclear plant also requires personal qualities in a crisis, what the Navy calls “command presence”, the ability to take charge, impose your will upon situations, and, at the end of the day, that is what these guys lacked, both were kind of nerdy, and the Navy was pretty upfront about it. Civilian programs look for the same, can’t have a shrinking violet in charge in certain siuations.

Speaking of Heisenberg, I recall some speculation that he deliberately slowed down the Nazi nuclear program. Anybody know if that’s true?

I read up on some of this years ago and my memory is sketchy. However, without reviewing the material, my impression remains that Heisenberg was rather an ardent Nazi or at least markedly slavish in courting official Nazi/governmental favor.

The slowing down claim came across to me as post-war revisionism/rehabilitation. Most of the slow progress IIRC was simply lack of resources & commitment by the German government. Apparently Hitler was at least mildly concerned that an uncontrolled uranium fission reaction (i.e, explosion) could spread to the atmosphere in sort of an ice9 fashion, obliterating the earth.

Sounds childish and silly then, but Hitler, and whichever advisors put this notion in his head, were hardly alone. Apparently there were at least a few sighs of relief among various (non-idiotic) Americans after Trinity/Los Alamos that this didn’t happen.

Again, details are fuzzy, this is from long ago reading and maybe the material has been debunked/changed since then.

I know of one example supporting this: An old college buddy of mine got his doctorate in theoretical physics, and after spending a year or two in some bunker studying solar neutrino emissions said something much to the effect of your comment. He is now a lawyer.

See, all physics guys aren’t necessarily really smart if it took him that long to figure it out. Happened to me in my third year, I’m still glad I caught on early. Finished the degree and moved on.

Another thing about physicists – yes, people tend to think they are smart and consequently often give their opinions greater weight than warranted. One result of this is the field tends to attract people who want other people to think they are smart or even to convince themselves over their insecurities that they are natural genius.

This dynamic is/was (been out of it for years) extremely prominent, just oozes from everyone in the field, the neediness to feel like they are incredibly smart, as opposed to hardworking, people. Even as an undergrad, I could see this in all my profs and was another major thing in me pursuing other options in life, I didn’t want to have colleagues with this pathetic neediness. Really, nearly every competent physicist is constantly in a battle to prove how smart he is, even the really smart accomplished ones. Kind of sucks being around people like that all the time, IMO.

I’m not sure that Hitler ever even contemplated the idea of an atomic bomb, or if he was ever briefed on it. The Germans had alreadly fairly early in the war given up on any idea of building a nuclear weapon. Their research was directed solely at building a reactor, based on what I have read anyway.

What I seem to vaguely remember is someone recounting a conversation with Hitler where he expressed this concern and maybe it was not only about bombs but reactors as well. But again, I’d have to go back and dig around for details, but I’m certain about the recollection of Hitler discussing/entertaing the thought, and it was also fairly early in the war IIRC.

Mexicans are just Fred Reed’s pet noble savages. This patronizing BS has been emanating from white people since at least the 19th century. Idealizing an ethnic group as Fred & other white romantics do is as racist and infantilizing to the target group as is hating them. No difference whatsoever, regardless of the patronizer’s good intentions.

This is especially egregious in Fred’s case because he never misses a chance to say something awful about Americans, they are all fat, stupid, greedy, etc. Not at all resembling the Eloi-like Mexicans if Fred the Repetitive is to be believed.

I don’t see why the guy just doesn’t get a job with the Mexican tourist promotion bureau or whatever and call it a day. And on top of that, this stuff is boring – it was fun to poke holes in it at first, but it is too easy.

These columns are so predictable that I think he must have a computer program write them. Been a real long time since I’ve read anything interesting by him.

Ron Unz – you might want to consider dropping Fred. Not because I disagree with him, but because he has become boring/repetitive and his columns no longer seem to serve any purpose.

The basic laws of physics tell us, at a first approximation, if we ignore the effects of air resistance, that a projectile hurled into the air at high velocity returns to the ground at the same velocity.

Uncanny how this follows the recent physics thread.

The above statement isn’t even wrong, it is just nonsense.

First, if we ignore air resistance, i.e, we can’t in any meaningful way talk about hurling something into the air, since the only effect of air, apart from nearly negligible buoyancy, gravitational effects of air mass, etc, is air resistance. But I’ll concede that is pedantic. Anyhow, the author seems to have meant to say in a vacuum.

In this case, the basic laws of physics don’t tell us at a first approximation, that … Rather, the basic laws of physics, if whether classical or modern, tell us that that the body will return at exactly the same velocity.

However, if we do consider the effects of air, it isn’t to a first approximation except for very short distances. A falling human body in a prone position reaches 120 mph and gets to that pretty quickly.

From wikipedia:

“Higher speeds can be attained if the skydiver pulls in his or her limbs (see also freeflying). In this case, the terminal velocity increases to about 320 km/h (200 mph or 90 m/s),[2] which is almost the terminal velocity of the peregrine falcon diving down on its prey.[3] The same terminal velocity is reached for a typical .30-06 bullet dropping downwards—when it is returning to earth having been fired upwards, or dropped from a tower—according to a 1920 U.S. Army Ordnance study.[4]”

A common physics 101 problem is working this out and students are generally amazed to find out that if you fall out of a 4th story window or so you achieve 90% or so (I qualify with “or so” because it is been a long time since I’ve done the math) of the velocity you’d achieve if you fell out of a plane at 5000 feet. Or 50,000 feet, etc.

That isn’t a first order of approximation at all – again, in some extremely limited, low distance/low velocity cases one might justify this, but as a general case and specifically in one with the muzzle velocity of typical bullets and the height they achieve, it is not just inaccurate, it is directly at odds with the facts.

That all being said, a typical bullet, regardless of what aspect it assumes, striking the top of one’s head at ~200 mph sounds like it could do some heavy damage – I’m not disputing that.

Today’s western women really are whores.

They are trash. And western fathers are a total disgrace raising girls like these.

I abhor the behavior of the mob in Cologne of course, but I can hardly blame them for the impressions they’ve formed about western degeneracy. I’d bet that any Ozzies transported from 1950s or earlier western civ to the present day would come to conclusions closer to those of the refugees than those of a contemporary western male. They’d just differ only in what actions they might take based upon those conclusions and I’m not entirely convinced that a bunch of young, footloose partying 1950s western men might similarly conclude that they are in the midst of some Saturnalia, jungle rules apply, and decide to join the fun in some manner from which they would be inhibited in their original environment. And since they are new to all this, they might misjudge the situation a bit.

Same thing sometimes happens with western guys visiting Boy’s Towns along the Mexican border, current/former fleshpots like Thailand, Phillipines, etc., which can seem at first like anything goes, but even degenerated social milieus have some social boundaries that aren’t at all obvious at first to people from more ordered societies.

The only difference is that in Cologne they were running in a group of 1000+ as opposed to two or three bros getting out of hand in some unbelievable, to a typical middle class first world neophyte, red light district.

Again, I’m not at all giving the mob a pass on behavior, but their initial conclusions aren’t entirely irrational given the stark contrast between the way many women present these days in our society and theirs.

Judging from the minimizing statements of the left-ish media/German authorities, it seems like this is one point where social conservatives and liberals may find some agreement

“What about anti-aircraft rounds that come back down? Are there significant casualties caused by all that falling debris? I always remember the opening rounds of Desert Storm in 1991 with all those tracer rounds lighting up the sky over Baghdad. I always wondered what happened when they came back down.

Also I wondered what happened with the expended shell casings coming out of fighters. A WW2 Mustang would drop its .50 caliber brass casings as it fired. Surely some of those rained down on European cities. Did they cause casualties?”

According to this thread, the answer is yes for falling shrapnel at least and furthermore, plenty, this can be a very major cause of casualties. I didn’t see anything about casings, though.

http://www.ww2f.com/topic/36323-ground-casualties-from-air-battles/

Turns out casualties from falling shrapnel, casings, and such is a pretty lively topic:

http://www.google.com/search?q=casualties+in+war+caused+by+falling+shrapnel

blaming the victims is an attempt to deflect attention away from the threat

I guess you and people making similar comments have never been out for an authentically rolicking good time.

The women act and look like whores to these guys, and probably to nearly every member of western civ until the past generation.

There is a reason modest dress is encouraged/adopted in healthy societies. BTW, the converse does not follow, modest dress does not necessarily imply health societies, so please don’t accuse me of saying this. I shouldn’t have to write that out, but you doubtlessly have zero facility with predicate logic and if I didn’t spell this out Barney-style, you would have further cluttered this thread with another vacuous thought. Actually, “thought” would give too much credit – maybe “echo some other person’s vacuous thought” would be more accurate.

You sound like one of those naifs who says, oh, lets put women on submarines and it is all the guys fault if one of them so much leers at a female. That school of thought contends that the men are supposed to obey orders, right?, and this is just a discipline problem, not a human nature. The difference between the male submariners and the refugees is only quantitative, not qualitative.

I’m one of those who think maybe a machine gun emplacement at Ellis Island might have been a better idea than a welcome center, so I have no sympathy for the “refugees” in europe. But I’m not interested in being a protective male, defending some society so the women can go around acting and looking like whores.

Problem is, you (or people from whom such mindlessly unoriginal and unthinking drivel oozes – hint: “blame the victim” was trite nlt than late 1970s – are so saturated with propaganda you’ve been co-opted yourself by the degeneracy and so forth that you probably believe you oppose.

Despite all that, there is another thing I know. Regardless of my opinions on cultural decay, I would come to the aid of one of those victims well before you would no matter how long I paused because you never would. But I wouldn’t be waiting for the move you are never going to make, I would be acting post-haste.

Because I have in the past, been there, done that, given and taken some lumps and I am a very lucky man to be alive and typing now. I’m sure you will dismiss this as braggadocio, though.

To the point – why I know this about you and your ilk. People who repeat such reflexive idiocies are cowards. Mentally, simply because they parrot the small ideas of others. And physically, because the body follows the mind.

You’d know all this too if you had the slightest hint of a backbone. Try doing or thinking something original, daring, take a risk for once in your useless life rather than just being a shallow and transparent tool.

“Oh all right then guv it’s a fair cop.
I knew all along that if you spunk a round off in the general direction of God, it just runs out of puff due to various fluids dragging it to a stop, and goes into a low orbit along with the battered relics all the ten-gallon hats, footballs, rabbits, cows, cigarette butts, beercans and fleas ever loosed upwards.

If bullets were the size of housebricks, or cows, then I’d be worried. Any of them dropped from a mile 0r so might sting a bit, due to the influence of the ridiculously feeble force of gravity, and compounding. Their mass ensures that any buffering due to air resistance wouldn’t help a lot.
If on the other hand, there was no air, we’d still be fairly safe, as the ammo would just beetle off into space, having easily defeated gravity.
You sla-aaaa-gggg!”

Good thing for you that spouting physics without a clue isn’t against the law. I thought your first comment was bad, but you’d get life if not the chair for this one.

The cultural practice of firing a fully automatic AK-47 up in the air isn’t that ancient. Wasn’t seen anywhere before 1947 as it happens.

The AK47 was still in development in 1947, so I guess that is a pretty safe statement.

What about other firearms?

Most cultures demand a level of exposure to risk and hard labor that ensured a base line level of virility in men. yours is a perfect encapsulation of red-pill alt-rightery though. “Why doesn’t the government make chicks sleep with us like it did in the Middle Ages. Only we don’t want to have to do any of the snake-handling religious crap or go to church. Also we want a ton of porn.”

Thread winner.

A CIA analyst said that the presentation was fine, but there was no way the Soviet Union was going to break up in his lifetime or his children’s lifetime. The analyst’s name was Robert Gates.[36]” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_Soviet_collapse#Robert_Gates

World events were feeling awfully hinky/unusual through spring/summer 1989, but I’d say it wasn’t until autumn 1989 and especially the opening of the Berlin Wall that this wasn’t the view of nearly everyone on planet earth who had an opinion on the topic. The Soviet Union was just part of the firmament.

1989 was truly a year of miracles and I’m very happy I had the opportunity to both live and participate in those times.

I think it is no surprise that tradition western Christian culture frowned on, if not prohibited things like ursury and gambling. There was an understanding that there needed to be limits on the bright being able to take advantage of the dim, lest it undercut the society, and gambling and ursury or clearly great methods to take money from the weak minded. It is really no different than the belief that men should not take advantage of women, children or the elderly because they are weaker. This was tecognized as behaving in a civilized manner.

Public lotteries are effectively a tax on people with low mathematical skills.

Collusion among players in online poker is difficult to do. Even more difficult to do profitably. Yet even more difficult to do profitably without getting caught. And impossible to do consistently, profitably, and without getting caught. A high schooler could design a script to detect it.

Why is this? I’m genuinely curious, having zero experience with online poker.

Hold it hold it hold it. That would be among the worst things to do regarding gambling. If it goes underground it wouldn’t be too long before the Mob took it over again.

From what I’ve heard, and I may be completely wrong, not everything about having the Mob run gambling is 100% negative. One thing I’ve seen cited is that one’s odds/percentage of the ticket/take that goes to payoffs was far higher in the numbers racket than it is in a typical state run lottery.

Remember also, William Shockley, another Nobel Laureate and MIT PhD in physics, whose IQ was in the 120′s. Maybe all the great doers weren’t bullshiting us when they kept touting the most important element to accomplishment, namely perseverance?

There are lots of models for why people achieve intellectual excellence. Certainly one of them is personal insecurities about one’s ranking in the cognitive hierarchy. In another thread, I mentioned that this is endemic in physics and was one of the reasons, after acing an undergraduate degree in physics, I decided to pursue another path in life.

At the same time, the reason I chose physics in the first place – apart from the fact that a some portion of the field is devoted to creating loud explosions, always alluring to young men – was its reputation as the hardest major, that the people in it were the smartest. And if people in the field are truly honest with themselves, it is an extremely common factor (among others) in choosing this path. Not very complicated really, everyone likes the prospect of being a member of some sort of elite.

I’d fairly say that an inordinate percentage of the guys that got the highest grades and distinguished themselves were guys who were a bit of the mark from being the most natively intelligent because of the drive, in addition to having a high degree of native intelligence when considered against the “general population” but a bit off from the highest, engendered by these insecurities. That combination often put them ahead of “naturals” unwracked, and often these people are quietly but profoundly obsessed with this, by these concerns.

And throughout many technical endeavors that have followed, I’ve observed this pattern regularly. It isn’t universal, but it is a fairly common theme.

Achievement, as conventionally recognized, in intellectual endeavors, is strongly correlated with mental capacity measured by IQ and other devices, but it is far from a perfect correlation. Even psychology formally recognizes this, acknowledging that IQ above about 150 is where the already imperfect correlation starts significantly decreasing. Basically, “intelligence” or IQ above this level is so abnormal that it often results in outcomes that are categorized as dysfunctional wrt to what one would expect from a person with an IQ of 160. It is surprising how many people at this level end up as waitresses and so forth.

Overachieving is as common as underachieving and that applies all the way up the IQ scale. Actually, it may be more common if one thinks about distribution curves – almost by convention, only people with superior intelligence will be tagged as underachievers, whereas anyone can be an overachiever.

If you are truly confident that you are smarter than nearly anyone you’ve ever met, it just becomes something as mundane as being really tall or having good hair. It is pretty cool, any gift in life is, but you don’t sweat it. And you think, well, why should I spend 20 years slaving away in obscurity for a shot, at best, for a Field prize just so everyone thinks I’m smart? Heck, you know that already, why not chase some babes, make some money, have some thrills. That is appealing to someone with an IQ of 100, why wouldn’t it to at least some with an IQ of 160? Just because one is born with an upclocked processor doesn’t necessarily mean one desires the life of a geek at the chalkboard.

Incidentally, that is a nearly universal assumption made by people closer to the mean, that people with inordinately high IQs are always attracted to such a life and if they aren’t, something is the matter with them. Believe me, the headwinds, social approbation, etc, one receives for bucking these expectations, especially when young and in the clutches of the education apparatus, are enormous. You are seen to be wasting a gift from God and so forth and are basically a bad person.

Were I king, I’d ban IQ testing, at least for uses by the education establishment – it isn’t any of their f**king business, IMO.

Trump is natively brilliant and clearly knows it, hasn’t the slightest doubt or insecurity about it. Heck, he says it all the time more or less, but people take it as bluster. But believe him, he simply chose, whether consciously or not, to live a vigorous life and directed his gifts quite successfully towards that goal.

If you are really smart, you catch on very early in life that the nerds don’t get the cheerleaders. And if it is cheerleaders you want, why not apply your intelligence, and whatever else, to that goal. Pretty natural conclusion for someone of average intelligence, dontcha think it at least occasionally occurs to someone a few sigmas on the high side?

I’m always highly amused at how he is described as an idiotic buffoon and such by his opponents.

Continuing along that high IQ/unconventional outcomes thought. It wouldn’t surprise me if Steve Sailer has an higher IQ than most people would expect. I wouldn’t guarantee it, but his output & life pattern has many of the fingerprints of such a scenario. I mean, he’s figured out how to live a singularly unusual, interesting/stimulating, and comfortable life far outside the bounds of social expectations basically doing what the f**K he likes while implicitly/explicitly shooting the bird to the dead weight of social expectations, PC, respectability, etc. That is not an easy problem to solve, lots harder than some math proof.

One further thought on Steve. Though he isn’t boastful about it, he obviously has intimates/associates who are recognized as world class brainwaves or achievers. Dollars to doughnuts, more than one of them has told him, or at least thinks, that he is one of the smartest people they’ve ever met.

Steve?

Yeah, cowardly in this emerging usage usually actually indicates something that takes a terrific amount of nerve but is illegal/wrong, etc. Like the 9/11 hijackers being described as cowards. Say what you will about them and their cause, but being a kamikaze pilot is not for the faint of heart. Same with taking potshots at the police.

This is how words change meaning over time. Maybe a century on, coward will simply mean bad person who did something dramatic. Or just bad person, and the dictionaries will note the archaic usage pertaining to timid/fearful.

Here is one for Steve – could this changing meaning of coward be tied to a greater social trend, i.e., the increasing tendency in the west to completely demonize the opposition in recent decades? Walter Palmer, the lion hunter, was often described as a coward, etc. I don’t know how much realistic danger he faced sneaking up close to huge wild animals to take them out with a bow and arrow, but it seems like a situation that could be risky. In any event, it certainly didn’t decrease the danger level in his life, if he was a coward he would have just stayed home and took a few more dental appointments.

Sessions is not electable.

His accent alone ensures that. Too much of the public now just unconsciously thinks, bad person, probably a closet racist. The only way someone with an accent like that could win a national election is for them to be some off the hook guy like Trump who can just blithely roll over this sort of noise and Sessions, for whatever his merits, isn’t that guy.

He also has a bit of Ron Paul in his presentation, flap ear guy who is courtly in his arguments, but you can’t tell he is pretty exasperated that more of the general public can’t seem to get the obvious rightness of the stuff he presents.

There are a lot of people smarter than me.

That clinches it. That is what 10s always say. If you tell a knockout women that she’s the most beautiful women you’ve ever seen, the stock response is, “There are a lot of prettier women than me”.

Isn’t this another example of the “Luck of the Trump”, says something outrageous and events bear him out.

Last summer he said migrants to the U.S. were rapists, howls of outrage. Admittedly, he wasn’t talking about euro-migrants, but it is hard not to draw parallels….

Both Feynman and Shockley were extraordinarily intelligent and the IQ numbers associated with them there are obviously way off. (Also, don’t forget that some geniuses aren’t prodigies and don’t really mature intellectually until at least college, after all the IQ tests they took got taken.) And one test means nothing. I topped out every IQ test I ever took in school (which had a scale that went up to 150 or so) except one which for some reason is the one that my school district provided to my teachers — although 133 is quite smart they knew it couldn’t be right and all told me I was the smartest kid the school had ever had. Above 150 I don’t think IQs are as linearly ordered, so I won’t estimate mine, but I got 2400 on the GREs (before they were renormed to make high scores easier) and was a member of the Four Sigma Society until I figured out that although they were smarter and more accomplished than Mensans they were underachieving relative to their IQs by the same factor.

You make two important points that one doesn’t often hear:

1) Replicability – by the time people are in their 20’s, they’ve likely had a number of tests that correlate imperfectly with intelligence – early age IQ, SAT, military tests, GRE, etc. What is the trend rather than what is one’s best/worst score. I’ve never been interested in Mensa, although I share your opinion, and wonder how many of their members would still qualify based upon their aggregate record rather than their cherry-picked best score.

My guess is that it would be not insignificant based upon my observations about many of the people who join these things. I’d further guess that there is a statistically significant cluster of people in these things that just barely qualify for membership and that is the best score they ever received.

2) The significance of scores thought to correlate with IQ above 150. First, as you note, the scores really become just scattershot – what does it mean to compare a score of 180 with 190? Can you really say one is substantially smarter than the other? Similarly, what does it mean to compare a score of 55 with 50?

These tests are not designed to measure at extrema of intelligence, it just out of the scale of the measuring tool and the accuracy becomes something like measuring the distance of one’s daily commute with a yardstick.

That’s because there aren’t even enough people around with IQ > 150/160 to reliably form a model applicable to that range of the scale and normalize the various tests. Can anyone think of a problem set that everyone with an IQ > 180 should be able to largely answer but those with IQ = 175 shouldn’t? How does one even begin to devise such a thing? And even were it possible, what would be the point?

anonguy, you’re on to something there. I’ve very loosely followed the careers of “cowardice” and “courage”–the words–and I’m not sure they’re being used in ways that respect their dictionary meanings

I’d be awfully surprised if linguists don’t have methodologies for measuring and expressing the rate of change in word meanings. It would be interesting to find out if things have accelerated since the inception of PC.

But even if they have, there are a lot of other variables in play, so one would have to figure out a way to isolate the effect, if any, of PC on language change. I’d guess I’d start looking for ways to do so by assembling a list of the words/phrases with the fastest “word meaning change velocity” during the period of interest.

Any linguists in the crowd?

And now you hear about the SJWs organizing to block attendance to trump rallies by reserving all the tickets and more nefarious schemes.

So where are the civil rights prosecutions of the individuals and the RICO prosecutions of them acting collectively. Blocking people’s right to assemble for political purposes is a major, major civil rights violation, I’d believe, regardless of the criminal severity of the underly offense?

Any takers on whether Trump will eventually mention (but not whine) about how were the shoe on the other foot – i.e, right wing folks doing something like this?….

This is the best election cycle ever…. Trump has got to be thinking this is like shooting fish in a barrel.

I have known some people (e.g., a friend who entered grad school in math at Caltech at age fifteen) who seemed to me to have substantially higher IQs than Feynman. They achieved much less in life. My guess is that an IQ of 125 or so is necessary for high achievement, but, beyond that, it is the hard work.

Here is a fun recent example. Extremely good, nearly lifelong friend of mine, IQ in the mid 140s. Chem e undergrad from top school (i’m keeping this anonymized), MBA from top Ivy, brilliant career on both the tech and then mgt. consulting side, has made tons of dough, e.g., current hobby is collecting high end porsches with all the dough he’s made.

I’m moderately successful, but nowhere like him and I’ve had pretty aimless periods of my life. Anyhow, the other day, chatting on the phone, he mentioned some brain-teaser math problem he was working on, had been working on it for days, even wrote a computer program to test all possible answers. He says, hey, wanna give this a shot?

So he sends it along, I solve it in about 30 minutes, shoot it back. He’s always said I was super deluxe smartest guy he knows, all that, but still amazed by this.

I suggest, well, I dunno, some of this is how mathematicians think about problems and you are thinking like an engineer, save his ego a bit, even though I’m not a mathematician. I say, why don’t we send it to my sister, who is phd abd in math (decided to go mom-hood or just a slacker, hard to tell) and is married to shit hot math prof at top school.

She sends it back in about 2 hours, kind of apologetic that she was sort of tired and it took a while to refine the proof. My friend is somewhat mollified, although I didn’t tell him that my sister is this way out there IQ person and has been a total slacker her entire life – one of those genius waitresses, married a loser early on, that sort of thing.

This brain teaser was a monthly sendout by a high intellect society, so I surmise it wasn’t entirely a trivial thing. Personally, I think being a little behind the curve as opposed to ahead of it up the IQ scale on the average results in higher achievement. I’ve seen this sort of thing way too many times. Her husband, for example, is quite sharp in his field, world class dude, but she’s way smarter than him and he knows it.

But he’s hard working, organized, directed, long-term planning, everything my sister is not.

I asked my sister to give it to him, but I’ve never gotten anything back. She probably doesn’t want to risk banging his ego.

Most of the other famous physicists had highbrow tastes in culture — Bach, Kierkegaard, that kind of thing. Feynman liked Regular Guy stuff.

That is why they could make (and understand when hearing) witticisms about Eine Kleine Nachtphysik.

No silly, Steve is not saying that if race-skeptics are nicer then these real time tragedies wouldn’t happen. Steve is saying if the raw news is making your case for you, AND the narrative is already that you are a whacko nut… then its better to let the news change people’s minds and not go over the top on the rhetoric, allowing the topic to change from the facts to “look at the Nazi whackos!”. Its a point about what tactic is most effective at persuading the public, not which is likely to stop the events that are doing the persuading.

Back in 2007, the spiel from Ron Paul & supporters about, for example, the Fed was seen in the mainstream, whether left/right, as lunacy akin to something like Larouche going on about the British royal family masterminding the international drug trade. To the average person at that time, the Fed was this very innocuous institution like the local zoo or something. So going on about the Fed truly sounded like a lunatic delusion to a lot of people.

Since that time, skepticism about the Fed has become a lot more mainstream. And the Tea Party, then Trump movement, inheritors of much of the skepticism about the direction of the U.S., have become increasingly broader. But Ron Paul & supporters are still widely considered nuts even though on some fairly major issues they’ve been proven spot on.

As you note, keeping the proper focus entails keeping it on the desired outcome, not on getting ones opponents to admit that people they reviled were correct and that they themselves were completely wrong. That is directly counterproductive, nobody likes to do that & the byproduct of that is they will increase their defenses against the desired change out of pride rather than accepting it.

Backing people into a corner often makes them fight harder.

And then there is the saw about how when your opponent is destroying himself, it is better to let them continue without your assistance or something like that.

When it comes to any sort of conflict, I see combatants attacking non-combatants as cowardice. The addition of certain suicide doesn’t make it ‘heroic’ or ‘gutsy’. Fighting people who can’t/won’t fight back is always cowardly.

The absence of cowardice is not necessarily heroism, or bravery/gutsiness.

It seems like you are understanding the term coward more by its emerging new meaning rather than its more traditional one, which is exactly the point here. You don’t like what they did, so they are cowards. Traditional meaning is cowards refuse to do things because of a fear of death or other personal injury/harm.

I’d suggest that a more accurate term, as others have noted, for your sentiment is dishonorable, which is not necessarily cowardly. Pretty much, actually, the entirety of your comment precisely makes the case that the meaning of the term coward has been undergoing a lot of change recently.

I’d also note that you have a rhetorical argument style rather than a logical one, just presenting opinions with vehemence but sans any supporting rationale. That is another increasingly prominent style in our public discourse.

Are drone operators cowards? Do you make that case like you do this one? Seems to follow from your argument.

I’m a white guy that has been involved with a few women from other races.

Western society views the white male/asian female pairing far more innocuously than white male/non-white other than asian* female**. This is to the point where describing your relationship, or even your mixed kids, as “interracial” often seems to like an exaggeration to many white people, like you are inflating things. They don’t come out and say it, but they seem to be expecting a high drama, guess who’s coming to dinner thing with that word and they know that isn’t that way with asians* in western society.

That’s because, for whatever reason(s), whites/asians seems to be able to get on pretty well as mixed social/societal groups compared to other possible pairings. There is just a lot less drama emanating from asians minorities in the west and the converse is true in northeast asia and, at least in some cases, no fundamental hostility/grievance between the minority and majority in white/east asian mixed societies.

So the mixed kids can in some (note I said some, not all) in the minority side can fully identify with the majority culture without hesitation. I’ve seen this work in Japan as well. So the mixed white/asian kid can feel like he is marrying into his ingroup marrying a white person in America.

Here is an anecdote – years ago, I was with three friends, 2 who were white, 1 was Korean adoptee into white family. We were driving through rough part of town, Rob observes,”I wonder what people thing of 4 white guys driving through?”. Not only were we not 4 white guys, the speaker, Rob, was the one of Korean ancestry.

Northeast asians and whites just innately don’t perceive themselves as incompatible as they do with other peoples. They may not realize it, but there is the whole revealed preference thing and it is immense.

I actually was involved with one women for a surprisingly long while before I learned she was half white/half asian* rather than a white person as I had assumed. And it wasn’t because she was hiding things at all, it was simply so unremarkable to her that it just didn’t come up for a while and her look was pretty Caucasian, which isn’t too uncommon in these mixes. And when it did come up, for me it was at the level of, “Huh, whaddya know..”

*By asian, I mean what the now proscribed word “oriental” used to mean – Chinese, Korean, and Japanese. Maybe Vietnamese, but that is getting a bit of a stretch for purposes of this discussion.

**Can’t speak to white female/non-white male from a personal perspective although it may be exactly the same.

One can actually have a bit of fun with this white/asian dynamic. You describe yourself as being in an interracial marriage, having interracial kid(s) to a bunch of libs and they start falling all over themselves giving you social justice pokemon points. Then you let on that your wife is east asian – you literally can see them becoming crestfallen.

They want to take the pokemon points back, the emotion is, “that’s not *really* interracial”, but they know they can’t say/feel that. It is a very uncomfortable moment for them and a very good way to punk these types of people and show them their hypocrisies.

It’s because both are equally convinced of their superiority.

I’d actually contend something of the reverse, that both groups are convinced, and much of their respective histories reflect this attitude if not always expected outcomes, of their superiority to outgroups except with respect to each other, where they have some, perhaps unconscious, doubts about this assumption.

Generally, and usually quite reflexively/unconsciously, whites/east asians tend to sincerely treat each other as fully competent individuals in social groups, etc, at least by my anecdotal observation. The unequal treaties, extraterritoriality for europeans, etc, of the latter 1800s were hugely galling in east asia. These were comparatively mild manifestations of imperialism for the time, but they spurred far more resistance in much shorter time than much more severe forms of imperialism did elsewhere in the world.

Much of the history of east asia during that time was founded upon the determination of east asia to be on an equal footing with the great powers.

Police training tends to be rudimentary, but some police take an interest in pistol marksmanship and become fine shots.

You are ignoring the fact that a lot of police officers have become quite fine shots before they became police officers because of their military experience, which is a very common resume item for police officers. And police departments, at least when I got out of the Corps, seemed especially interested in former Marines – I had a number of solicitations that I did absolutely nothing to attract during several years after I got out. One reason for this is that police departments know that the USMC makes a relatively acceptable marksman out of nearly anyone, it is pretty unavoidable in the Corps even if you are an airplane mechanic, clerk, etc.

There are other reasons that police departments like military in general and Marines in particular, but the facility with firearms/other weaponry is definitely part of it.

I googled around a bit for percentage of police with military experience currently – doesn’t look like there is an authoritative figure, but the general answer seems to be lots.

But if you think that the Muslims were acting wild in Cologne, just wait until you tell them that they are being put on a plane to Africa.

Hong Kong had a huge influx of boat people – btw, the official designation used at the time to distinguish them as economic rather than political refugees – in the years after the Vietnam War and eventually decided to repatriate many of them back to Vietnam. This didn’t sit well with the refugees and they resorted to forcible repatriations for a tiny percentage.

This resulted in very negative international coverage and likely inhibited the government there from further resorting to this practice. And this was pre-Internet.

Al Haig, during the Marielito boatlift, suggested we load them all on ships and simply anchor them in Havana Bay. That was thirty five years ago and even then this idea was not politically acceptable.

About the only lever anyone in Europe who currently has access to the levers is willing to pull is paying the refugees/migrants to leave voluntarily and even that likely would be hugely controversial. There would have to be a profound, millenial probably, political shift in Europe before the slightest hint of coercion would ever be used to deport migrants en masse or maybe to deport them under any circumstance at all.

And that isn’t going to happen, nor is Trump going to do anything paradigm shifting in the unlikely event he were to win the presidency however entertaining the event would be. He may make some feints, but even as awesome as many on this and other alt-right sites find him, he is just one man bucking history at least on this point.

White nationalists, etc, need to realize that the golden era of white people is in its end game after a 500 or so year run. It isn’t going to return any more than the South is going to rise again or the Roman Empire is going to have an encore. It is simply yearning for a romanticized past, like southerners do about the Confederacy, that is a mental liferaft for people in changing times.

And it is quite interesting times in which we live, and as always better to look/plan realistically for one’s era and future rather than a passed (and sentimentalized) era. A white homogeneous nation these days would be an artificial, curated construct rather than some vigorous, naturally occurring phenomenon, the analogy is a wildlife refugee for endangered animals as opposed to a free ranging population.

So it isn’t even an issue whether the white nationalistic feelings expressed by many here are right or wrong, just as few things in history are truly objectively so. Whether one supports/opposes this viewpoint, it really doesn’t matter, since it is just a fantasy, not going to happen and decades of events consistently, uniformly, almost without exception demonstrate this.

For my part, I think it is as silly a pastime/delusion as any other delusional revanchist movement and anyone who has any belief, much less devotes a minute of their precious life to the goal, is simply a misguided fool ignorant of history, ignorant of politics, ignorant of how most white people think/feel, and even ignorant of themselves and their comrades.

Good luck with all that, and come back in 10 years or so and read my words here if you decide to ignore this type advice which I’m certain many others would give. At that time, I guarantee you will wish you hadn’t ignored this and had spent that time on something productive rather than wasting your life on some romantic vision that is clearly folly at best and viewed by at least the inevitable victors of this trend, and the overwhelming majority today as reprehensibly evil.

“But, but, what about all the polls showing people want immigration shut down” splutter the WN’s or WN-friendlies?

Revealed preferences, decades of it uniformly, nearly exclusively expressed across time and space…It is incredible, given the incidence of dweeby PUA types here that will go on about how women say they want one thing but do another, seem to have a blind spot about this when talking about what white people in America/Europe presumably say they want while at the same time taking it as an article of faith that western men have been feminized.

So there isn’t even a lot of consistency in the arguments presented here, and hence some may do well to check their backpacks about who may have been “feminized”, as lack of logic on the part of women is also one of the stock items in many iSteve commenters belief systems.

What about the in-laws? I can see how a White/ Asian relationship may run smoothly, but I wonder about the extended Asian family. Isn’t it a bit awkward to have Asian in-laws for a White man? Particularly if they’re FOB?

The culture is very different and you may not be accepted. Just curious.
And what about the angry looks from Asian men, seeing you’re stealing one of their women? There’s loads of frustrated young Asian kids who find themselves excluded from the dating pool. And I can understand them.

IME, there are at least as many benefits as drawbacks in having a language barrier with your in-laws. As for the kids, it is interesting how naturally they bridge these divides, at least, again, in my experience. It is actually like watching a magic trick, as they code switch between cultures/ethnicities.

The only two scenarios where I’ve encountered at least palpable hostility from males of the other when pursuing/attached with a women from their group has been with blacks in the U.S. and Mexicans in night spots somewhat off the gringo track in Mexico. I’ve not gotten anything that ever disturbed me enough to even notice with asians, and that includes the bona fide article in both asia/america and asian-american in U.S.

I did come uncomfortably close to a bad end once in Mexico, but again, there were other factors involved, like me being obnoxious for starters.

Don’t take that as commentary/comparison of general black/Mexican/asian attitudes, since a lot of other variables involved, small sample size for my observations (I’m just one guy), and the fact in each of these populations the overwhelming majority reaction was neutral and in probably equal measure in each population frequently positive.

Actually, I’d make one slightly broader observation – walking into lily white joints in the Deep South a few decades ago with a black women obviously on my arm would invariably make a presumably negative impression that even back then everyone would immediately repress. It would be like the whole place had a big silent gasp for a moment while at the same time everyone trying to pretend that they didn’t notice a thing.

And you knew that many of the white guys envied me, but were trying to hide it from their dates, since B was quite the looker.

Really fun to brazen through that kind of thing. Ahh, to be young again…

Maybe because the best DNA study show that Europeans are a kind of East Asian.

Do you have a reference? I’m being curious rather than argumentative.

Oh never mind.

Thanks for the very informative reply.

My question would be whether the online poker places have any interest in rooting out cheating or does it work to their advantage as a business? At least in the past, that charge has been leveled against ebay wrt to shill bidding. And online dating sites are hardly diligent in rooting out misrepresentations by their users, which suggests that this is viewed at least neutrally if not positively by operators of such sites. There is lots of easy, low buck stuff they all could be doing but they all don’t.

Did Shapiro get the term “catfishing” from reading iSteve? I’ve never heard of this word until Steve used it.

I became vaguely aware of it several years ago & upon a bit of research discovered that it is a commonly understood term among educated 20-somethings at least.

Are you kidding me? How many lives have been wrecked by the lies spread by rabid SJWs? How many innocent men (and women) have been hounded to the ends of the earth?

I’d say at least an order of magnitude, and perhaps more than that, less than those killed in falls down steps or in the bathtub, which,as we know, is an unconscionable plague upon the earth.

And probably even less than those killed (not just struck) by lightning in the U.S., much less the world every year.

Apparently she has, indeed, gotten both fat and married: http://gotnews.com/breaking-wedding-photos-of-jackiecoakley-uva-rape-hoax/. Poor fellow whoever he is.

It is amazing how obesity has become mainstreamed in recent years. At least on the surface, her beau looks like a reasonably together guy. Some years back, the only young guys seen with such grossly overweight partners were visibly losers. Either the losers are getting better at outward presentation or the young guys are lowering their standards, or some combination thereof is the only explanation that occurs to me.

This article brings up a word that might be useful in discussing the modern world: Anosognosia:

Anosognosia is a fascinating topic and understanding it, how to work within its constraints, is critical to any understanding of schizophrenia and effectively communicating with (many/most) sufferers.

Xavier Amador wrote “I Am Not Sick, I Don’t Need Help”, which is as good a place as any to start on the topic and learning the basic skills of communicating with the anosognosic. I fully agree with the OP that the concept and the skills for dealing with it are far more broadly applicable than just dealing with those formally deemed mentally ill.

A recent deep dive into this subject and then applying its concepts in a situation did much to expand my thinking about how we perceive reality and how to connect/communicate/reason with those who essentially live in a different reality. It is a short read and a way better investment of a few hours of one’s life than (yet again) watching some guys on the tube chase a ball around a field.

I actually love mid 19th century to pre-WWI prose, both anglo and american. Such lovely yet surgically precise turns of phrases – a modern remnant of this, for example, is the anglo term “articulated lorry”, which I adore.

Melville was unsurpassed in this regard – I can read anything he wrote just for the pure joy of his prose. His little bit about the relative social standing of whalers and pirates predicated upon the practice of hanging pirates has to be the cleverest several paragraphs I may have ever read.

But that was an era when the written word was paramount, the only means to communicate at a distance, so it was absolutely critical to be able to convey one’s intended meaning via writing in absolutely critical scenarios – no calling up to straighten out misunderstandings. So naturally reading/writing muscles were more developed then and have since progressively atrophied as visual/audio options have emerged.

I had an editor once who remarked that I wrote compelling prose and whatever that really means, it seems the heart of the issue – the more that readers are in the grip of something, the less they will be deterred by the impedance of challenging words, sentence structures, etc. That is a bit of a conundrum however – how can it be compelling if it is daunting? Presumably, reconciling that contradiction is the art of it. I’ve occasionally, a distressingly scant few occasions though, succeeded at this but haven’t the slightest prescription of any principles for doing so.

One thing is certain, however. It won’t ever happen if the writer surrenders to mediocrity. So if others are willing to allow themselves to devolve into brutes communicating with grunts, that is their business but I’m not going to join them.

I’m not sold that the decline of the written word is any more than that, i.e, more alternative forms of communication, as Steve notes about possible increases in image recognition. There may well be an Orwellian factor due to the rise of PC, sounds quite plausible, but I’d have to see more evidence, perhaps beginning with, as previously noted, a list of words that currently have the greatest “word meaning change velocity”. Such a list may provide clues about how to further proceed in assessing the effect of PC, mob rule on Facebook, etc, on language.

I’d really be interested in that, it could be a fascinating exercise although it is unclear what one might do with the results.

Steve you said that there can be no permanent winner in the battle of the sexes because there is too much fraternization of the enemy.

Steve quoted Henry Kissinger’s remark, which, while being a clever remark, is so well known that it should be a hackneyed, timeworn saw to anyone minimally informed and educated. You’d be surprised how much, and it all should be embarrassing, you reveal about yourself by your mistake.

Women are aroused by male strength and dominance above all other considerations. If the wider culture and ruling classes are arranging society so that Muslim migrants have the run of the place, and the native White men are hindered from expressing their displeasure and acting on it, the native White women will begin to feel desirous of those migrants, feeling in their bones that these are the tribe leaders they are looking for. But this is heady, Heartistian id analysis that is far too dark for most people, so I don’t expect any public shaming campaign of women’s redirected desire to begin any time soon.

Good Lord, you PUA guys present this stuff like it is the key to cold fusion or something. Women don’t like losers, what is so complicated about that and why didn’t that lesson sink in rather unremarkably somewhere between grades 5-8 along with, for instance, algebra, which, trivially simple as it is, is far harder to understand than this basic truth of the human condition.

Women like being pretty too. They like babies. They like nice cars, warm places to sleep, tasty food, entertaining entertainment, and so forth. And like men, they don’t like losers – why should they, no one else does. For the life of me, I can’t understand why this is such a great epiphany to some adult human males and furthermore why it is treated like some mystic, founding principle. It would be a lot more significant if the reverse were true.

When you guys first read something like that, did you slap your foreheads and exclaim, “Wow, and I always thought women liked losers?”. Honestly….

As for each individual German guy, the definition of a loser is one who accepts being beaten, the proof is in the pudding. And as in any situation, each individual has to decide whether working for change is worth it or maybe time to move on to greener pastures, like, say, the refugees recently have. They certainly haven’t acquiesced to the raw deal they were apparently getting handed in MENA, it would seem.

A loser only becomes one when he surrenders. Women (and other sundry human beings) understand that as well, just in case that concept also has been elusive.

FWIW-it’s a pretty damned creepy feeling to publicly address an aspect of Topic A, about which you think there’s common knowledge, and discover you’re the only SOB who knows anything at all about Topic A.

To crib from, well some guy, what America needs is a better class of idiots.

Testing your thesis, my expectation is that at least the senior set (maybe ~55yo or older) among the WNs tuning in here from their parent’s basement should know who the cribbee here is immediately as “some guy” used to be one of their fellow travelers.

Since the Marines, as far as I know, still take the position that every Marine is first a rifleman, and only after that some other military occupational specialty, they would tend to be good police recruits insofar as firearms proficiency goes. People in other services can develop the proficiency (Admiral Chester Nimitz was a very good pistol shot) and it can arise from avocation, but in the case of the Marines, it “goes with the territory.”

If one compares the marksmanship of Marines vs. Army soldiers, the finding isn’t that the best shooters are Marines – the best Marine marksmen aren’t consistently significantly better than those of the Army. Rather, it is that the worst marksmen are from the Army. And that isn’t entirely accurate, the lowest score won’t necessarily be from the Army group. However, the Army group, at least those whose members are from outside combat arms fields, typically will contain a significant fraction of shooters with a poor level of skill only found in the rare outlier Marine who is invariably a standout defective in many other regards.

This won’t be a subtle finding, it will be evident immediately – I’ve had occasion to observe this repeatedly. And it is simply because the USMC formally trains/qualifies all Marines in the basic principles of marksmanship in boot camp and repeats this two week training/qualification every year for all Marines – everyone, all ranks, I don’t think anyone ever achieves a rank where they don’t have to do this, at least by policy. And one’s qual scores are considered in promotions and even in basic respect among Marines.

Ask any Marine, current and former, about his rifle scores. If he did well, he’ll often be willing to go on in interminable detail about his shooting, some shot he fluffed (and why..) on qual day the 3rd time he qualified, on and on. Even within the expert range, Marines will make an unofficial distinction between expert and “high expert” which, in my iron sight days, started around a score of 230. Being able to shoot high expert consistently is the stud level and those who do so are usually quite proud of this accomplishment.

If he did poorly, he’ll likely want to talk about other things. Or he’ll inflate his scores – self reported rifle scores by former Marines are notoriously unreliable, only a DD214 will tell for sure. I think I’ve encountered more claimed holders of range records than there are range records possible.

One’s level of proficiency is prominently displayed on one’s dress uniforms via a qual badge. It tends to register negatively with junior Marines if someone they are supposed to respect – officer, staff NCO, sports the “toilet bowl” and really, most junior Marines expect that a senior officer/NCO “in full” should be wearing an expert badge, even a sharpshooter one is questionable. I know it was to me. And not only is one’s qual level displayed, but if at expert level, how many times one has achieved that.

So what one finds with any random group of Marines is that virtually all of them are able to handle their weapons with a basic degree of competence (as defined by the Corps), getting rounds down range with some accuracy. One can’t say that about the Army, at least during the era I had occasion to observe this and I’d guess this is still largely the same.

I’ve read that this distinction was noted by the enemy in Korea at least, that Americans wearing the yellow leggings – a Marine uniform item then that distinguished them from the Army – could return fire from greater distances. Similarly, that they should be more cautious attacking U.S. support groups so attired because they are going to be able to return fire far more effectively than one would expect from truck drivers, clerks, etc.

Perhaps it is USMC myth, I haven’t dug into it deeply, but it sounds believable to most Marines at least.

Even at that early stage of life, I was impressed by the institutional excellence of Marine marksmanship training. Again, it wasn’t that they produced the best shots, but how they could consistently make such a high percentage of people into reasonably acceptable ones. And they do this in a very broad fashion, decade after decade, for hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life, demographics and so forth.

Everyone knows that drill instructors wear special headdress – the smokey the bear hat (I’m using non-Marine terminology for clarity). Rifle/pistol range personnel are the only others in the Corps with special headdress, a khaki pith helmet. As with drill instructors, it identifies those who are in charge – one can’t be screwing around on a live firing range with hundreds of shooters in the relays. But one can also take it as a bit of acknowledgement that, like boot camp, the rifle range is a bit of Marine “holy ground”, where part of what makes the Corps the Corps is learned and exercised by all Marines no matter what their job may be. The USMC loves its traditions and rituals, no doubt.

Here is a bit on the pith helmet, all this goes way back:

http://www.3rdmaw.marines.mil/News/NewsArticleDisplay/tabid/8112/Article/548527/the-history-behind-the-hat.aspx

This ethic is also acknowledged by the cross rifles on Marine enlisted rank insignia that the Army analogs do not have. Marksmanship is one central element of the Marine identity – everyone is at root a fighter – without which it would be a fundamentally different institution.

I suspect there’s a relevant literature that deals robustly with changes in denotation and connotation of words, but it could be a real slog through specialized linguistics, or lexicography, or literary criticism.

My thought as well – I’m hoping a linguistic sherpa might show up here and short circuit the need for that slog.

This is kind of hackneyed and timeworn itself. Is it not? You reveal a little about yourself with comments like this one.

Yeah, that I sometimes forget the need to dumb down stuff for people who can’t perceive the obvious irony/intensifier in using a hackneyed and timeworn device to criticize another example of the same.

Get it now?

The question is, is it “right” for Whites to defend their genetic continuity as a people and if it is, do they have the will to enforce it? It’s my belief that the answer to the first question is yes. We exist because we did have that will for centuries. We are losing that rapidly.

You feel you have the right to decide who I can breed with? Ok, I don’t think people with such totalitarian and racist tendencies should be able to breed on the chance that this may be heritable.

Such tendencies have led to a lot of disastrous outcomes, why take the chance?

And, I’d wager that more people in the U.S., or even limited to the white people for whom you claim to care so much, would support my proposed restriction set than yours if they had to choose and by a very wide margin.

Wow, just wow… Do you really, honestly support your proposed policy or are you making some joke that is going over my head?

By far the most white male/Asian female couples I’ve known include guys who, to put it gently, weren’t exactly ripping it up with the white ladies. They’re the gender equivalent of the fat white girls with black guys. It’s called a lack of options.

Even though I’m married to an Asian lady and have ripped it up with women of a lot of races, not just (but including) white ones, I’d agree with this, including the “by far” part. This stereotype is actually one of the downsides of having an Asian wife. It isn’t a huge thing, a minor irritant at best, but it is there and, again, doesn’t seem to be without at least some basis.

I have found the effect tends to decrease with age, as Asian women generally seem to age a lot better – probably a combination of genetics and cultural stuff. So the hit on status for being Asian is somewhat offset by an increase in appearance ranking – you may not have had the fever in your youth, but you’d maybe now swap the fat cow your wife has become for one now. Plus, I’ve found Japanese women at least tend to retain a certain spirit of fun/girlishness (p.s. don’t confuse this with obedience/submissiveness, a common western mistake) a lot longer than American women do if they ever had it at all. That also increases appeal/attractiveness.

There are a lot of variables there and even within Asian ethnicities. In short, people tend to accord somewhat higher status to an Asian wife of Japanese origin than Korean and Chinese. One could say this is due to the economic rankings of those countries, but interestingly enough, it mirrors the perceived social rankings of very long standing in Hawaii of ethnic groups from these countries.

Actually, I’d even go so far as to say that the negative stereotype often dissipates entirely when the stereotyper finds out the women in question is Japanese, which is a lot less of the percentage of Asian wives of Americans the past generation or two. In a lot of cases, the impression even becomes distinctly positive. Seems to me that many American whites, and across the spectrum from SJW to Stormfronter, seem to view Japanese as sort of honorary whites or something, even though they may not recognize themselves that they are making this distinction.

With an Asian wife, esp. one with accented English, people will frequently ask how we met. I sometimes lean right into the stereotype and answer that I bought her on the Internet or in a Yokohama whorehouse, depending on my mood. She’s a remarkably good sport about this sort of thing.

Anyow, just one guy’s experience, ymmv.

Are those who support these laws as arrogant as those above whom you criticize?

No, because those incestuous ones are nearly universal taboos that are central to just about any civilization, very, very limited exceptions. It is as controversial as acknowledging that feces stinks or something.

Outgroup restrictions on breeding are far less common, and are often controversial within the groups themselves. Gotta make a more explicit case for them, just the facts mate, you are not comparing like things.

Today you’re permitted to breed with as many people as you can talk into it, but can only offer legal protection to one of them at a time. Is this a violation of your rights?

Non sequitur on your part, no response necessary on my part.

Sorry, forgot this:

You’re not permitted to breed with your mother, sister, aunt, niece, or (assuming you got lucky once) daughter.

For your sake, I’d hope you are only using a figure of speech as luck has little to do with this sort of thing. Thinking about it now, I’d say using that figure of speech may sometimes be a bit of a tell on a guy who isn’t doing too well romantically, or at least as well as he would like. Unconsciously reveals a fundamental view by the user of the term that guys are innately the needy ones/supplicants in sexual politics.

Care to comment on that?

Given the source, it dovetails with my opinion that white nationalist/racist views are essentially rent-seeking loser white guys.

I’m old enough to have seen/parleyed with the women of the 70s. I started noticing about 15 years ago that surprisingly few of the women at the beach were sexy. And I had expected that one of the compensations of age was that more of the younger women looked hot.

But it wasn’t the case and it has only got worse – obesity among the very young everywhere and it seems more common among young women than men. I tell the young guys that I do feel sorry for them because of this, but they seem oblivious, since this is the only reality they’ve experienced.

And even at least some guys that are doing quite well, have hot girlfriends, are likely to make a positive remark about a women who by prevailing standards in the past would have been relegated to “fat chick” status by most anyone.

I guess this is good from the female perspective, they get to eat all they want and still be a player. And the young guys, with no basis of comparison, don’t seem to be complaining, so ultimately who am I to criticize.

Overall, seems to be an example of how rapidly standards of beauty can change.

Good forensics!

Perhaps Asians are better at concealing their disgust for mixed couples? And certainly less aggressive to act upon it.
You should read what Asian men write in forums about white men stealing their women.

I’m aware if this material. I didn’t say these attitudes don’t exist, just that I personally haven’t perceived it (I even noted that, that maybe it was there, but I didn’t notice) and was quite clear on that point. Very clear.

Also, you were lucky not to be roughed up by Blacks while parading around with a good-looking Black girl!

Luck has nothing to do with it. And one of the basics of squiring any woman, in my view at least, is understanding that the attractive power of female sexuality is attractive to evil as well and it at least linearly correlates with the degree of female attractiveness broadcast into the ether. For my part, I take my duties as the male member of the team quite seriously. It isn’t a specifically racial thing in any way.

Incidentally, evil is infinitely resourceful in presenting itself in a form attractive to female sexuality. Bad boys, anyone? And this is hardly a new observation, or opinion at least. There is a reason the Bible story has the serpent approaching Eve rather than Adam.

Considering the insight I gained from it, I had the good fortune to have had a hard 10, and I mean that quite literally, early in life for a girlfriend. As an aside, good fortune had nothing to do with me acquiring her, just in considering what I gained from the experience. Women like that are bombarded constantly with negative stuff.

At best it is stuff like the creepy guy two doors down who has been working up the nerve, thinking about her obsessively, for 6 months to simply say hi and it only gets worse from minor stuff like this. They live in a world where there are always people trying to capture her by some means or another, and that includes just guys passing by in public.

This is of course true in varying degrees for any woman – it is just that the intensity and amount of it is brought into such stark relief at an extreme level of female attractiveness it is hard not to observe and draw conclusions from such an abundant data set. It is pretty much in your face 24/7 in this scenario.

So one of your jobs as a guy is to protect her from direct assaults by naked evil and to help filter out evil packaging itself in a manner designed to make itself attractive to female impulses.

Again, this is true of any woman, at least the ones I have experience with which, admittedly, is a vanishingly small fraction of the entirety of womanhood. However, the consistency of my experiences has made me conclude this is a basically universal condition.

At the high extremum, this constant barrage can be awful hard on a woman – it is hard not because they are women, just because it is a constant stressor. Men have can difficulties managing their sex-specific stressors as well.

That is why it is a nearly universal constant in human cultures that women need be shepherded. It isn’t that they are stupid or inferior, as feminists wrongly infer from the custom. It is that female sexuality is so powerfully attractive to evil and that evil is so ambitious and creative in its means that it is unrealistic to expect anyone to be waging this fight in life alone.

In the case of the aforementioned 10, her beauty ultimately proved a curse that destroyed her. Her story would read like a biblical parable. Strong, dark stuff, let me tell you…

Mexicans don’t really care that much.

I don’t think anyone really cares that much in general – this stuff is highly situational and beyond that, attitudes of the same demographic, to the extent that attitudes can be generalized across such, are quite fluid over time. Sixty years ago, black/white pairings were almost invariably viewed negatively, and quite highly so, by the vast majority of white Americans, not just Southerners and some of it formally enshrined in law.

Whatever the degree of antipathy to such now among white Americans, at the very minimum anyone would agree that it is far, far less to the point that the difference is of kind rather than degree. And there is no shortage of white Americans who essentially will give you a merit badge for such a relationship these days.

So I take all that with a grain of salt and hasn’t really ever been a concern distinctly apart from the general duties of being the guy I outlined above. My observation is that people who – I don’t exactly what word to use, because I don’t want it to necessarily sound pejorative – care about race overestimate how much of a factor this is, especially in black/white pairings.

Trouble can find one in many ways in life and I’d say the troubles associated with interracial relationships have been down at the trivial noise level at worst in my life. As I said in my original post, the trouble that found me in Mexico was really do to other factors than a Mexican girl but it used that as a an easy point of departure.

BTW, in light of my last comment and as a hint for the cargo cult PUAs milling around here. My experience of one very strong tell that some lady is really into you very early on, even first date/encounter, is that she will say something along the lines of, “I feel safe with you”. IME looking retrospectively, this is a highly reliable indication. Probably even more significant these days as I’d think the prevailing culture might frown upon women expressing such sentiments, they are all supposed to be strong, independent, etc.

As background, I’m not any sort of hulking brute, just average height/weight.

Jeb Bush posts as anonguy O.o?

You know, I was certain that someone would accuse my thoughts of beta-tude or whatever you guys call it. I was even going to qualify the material and make a disclaimer on this point, but I decided that only the most terminal PUA devotees would be unable to understand the difference between masculine leadership, for lack of a better term, and beta-tude.

It looks like I was right. And honestly, you’d be a lot better off living by my philosophy, or at least have a more satisfactory love life, than the garbage you read on Heartiste, etc.

Now, I wouldn’t argue that many of the observations in the PUA community are totally devoid of any basis in reality. And I wouldn’t argue that it doesn’t improve the odds of success for its practitioners, perhaps only infinitesimally, but it likely does.

However, the fundamental flaw is that it is all retrospectively descriptive stuff that the adherents mistake for forward-looking prescription. Even myself, if I were to write down and rehearse what worked well for me in one instance and which you guys would recognize as a classic, perfect call and response between a man and woman, every word seen as perfect and exemplifying some PUA principle, something that you guys would parse as Talmudic scholars, I’m certain it would be a complete wash with the next woman. Well, maybe not a complete wash, but worse than just having a nice flowing conversation with someone.

The only thing PUA stuff does for guys is it simply forces them to get into the presence of women by encouraging them to be constantly “sarging”, if that term is still in currency. That is a huge step for a lot of guys because the odds of success go from zero hanging around your parent’s basement to at least something non-zero, no matter how small.

Really, that is all it is doing for you and if that is what it takes, I guess it is good therapy. But better therapy would be for you guys to lose all your misogyny, loser bitterness, and just go have fun with some women. Some of them really are fun/interesting people and such, hard as it is for you guys to believe they are no more than automata in control of a vagina. They really are more than that and, hard as it is to believe, life with that understanding is a heck of a lot more fun, rewarding, and meaningful.

One final tell on why PUA is BS. The most cursory review of the community will show an extraordinary and continuous amount of exhortatory material that PUA works.

This is the hallmark of BS, the need to constantly be convincing the target that it is true, works, whatever. Is 10% or even any visible percentage of mathematics discourse devoted to maintaining mathematicians faith that mathematics works?

No, of course not. Same for anything that gives results, success is obvious.

However, belief systems founded on fairy tales or simply belief systems that don’t deliver, and these can be all sorts of things, always, of necessity, have to devote a significant effort to maintaining adherents belief in something because, well, it isn’t working and the adherents naturally start getting a lot of doubts.

You know, who are you gonna believe? Your own lying penis or CH?

In the spirit of who/whom, who is one of Germany’s natural economic rivals in high skill/high tech/high value add manufacturing.

Certainly Japan is.

So are the crafty Japanese behind this? I’d add that the Japanese are famously against mass migration because they feel it degrades civilization.

Way back, 80’s I believe, MITI forecast a long term decline in American technical prowess because of the increasing population of Latinos and possibly blacks. This forecast specifically noted that Latinos have not demonstrated any ability to build a high tech economy anywhere on a par with U.S., Japan, Europe. IIRC, the report was extremely adamant on the fact that the number was zero as opposed to not many, rather less than U.S., etc. No, zero and no sign of one emerging.

Created the predictable hue and cry in the West. This was during a period when Japan was beginning to be held to western standards, so there were a number incidents of PC-naive Japan raising a lot of feathers.

These incidents largely stopped a long time ago quite dramatically. Is it because the Japanese, and more specifically economic planners in Japan, changed their viewpoints with corresponding speed and degree?

Of course not. They just learned that westerners are super sensitive about talking about this stuff.

This is a nation of long term business thinking. For instance, many high end Seiko watches include a movement that Seiko says took 28 years to develop. Can you imagine any American company spending 28 years on something, esp. something like a watch movement, before they even sell one of them?

Think, McFly, think… What’s in it for Japan here?

I wouldn’t get too heartened by Douthat’s column. Even the most ardent left-lib has gotta be seeing that NYT has become a one-sided propaganda megaphone.

Not that that is a bad thing, from NYT perspective, just allowing the appearance of such is a bad thing.

Douthat is window dressing. But nice that he is there.

I’ll believe it when the usual suspects there start writing similar opinions.

One point, though. The NPR lovers love their high euro culture vacations as much as they hate white people. Having the NY riots on the steps of a cathedral that they might want to visit sometime, the prospect that downtown Cologne (and other German cities) might get hollowed out like American cities did 2 generations ago and are now just stumbling back to even shadows of their former selves, is understood viscerally by Americans, even lefty-lib ones who may be unwilling to acknowledge their feelings.

I mean, f*ck, where are you going to go for that study abroad year? Third world is ok for short eco-tourism, but longer stuff requires a civilized country and knocking Germany out of the running reduces options for a lot of things.

France maybe did a itself disservice by shuttling MENA folks to the ‘burbs and out of sight, gave visiting (lefty, they love Paris, of course) Americans the impression that Paris and by extension France was a heck of a lot less diverse that it actually was becoming.

Americans know about aggrieved racial minorities in center cities like no one else….

Germany might be a chilling peek into the abyss for some lefty people.

Thanks for getting back on this, very interesting.

About 25 years ago, a member of the clergy made the oddest remark to me.

I asked him how many people lived in the small town where he reside. He said, “10,000 and we have 4000 Turks”. Funnier still, I’ve been back a few times since then, and I’ve still yet to see a Turk, or at least someone I recognize as such.

Around that same 25 years ago, I had some German guests on their first visit to the U.S. Initially, the appeal of suburbs was utterly lost upon them, “Why would you want to live in the country?”. They also were perplexed as to why one would lock their car doors while they were actually in their cars.

I wonder if there are many Germans who are still like this, at least up until the recent migration.

According to HBD’ers, we should expect Germans to react much like white Americans, German being one of the major ethnicities among white Americans and closely related northern Euros even more.

In America, they just moved away from the problem. Sure, there was lots of bluster in white flight years, disgruntlement, the occasional firebombing of the first house on the street to be inhabited by a black (incident like that happened nearby when I was a kid), all that, but they just faded like an ebb tide.

Same thing is going to happen in Germany. In the U.S., it took a generation to figure out how to maintain some semblance of order in center cities, expect a secular upward trend in crime in Germany w/all the attendant hand wringing but not much action for a very long while. American criminal justice system was getting positively mushy-headedly scandinavian by the time the rising crime of the 60s really started hitting home.

If they do deport, it will be well below the amount to have any meaningful difference – even if they deported 500,000, which would require a miracle to happen, that is 500,000 remaining.

There is no way out of this one. Germany, at least the one we knew, truly is kaput.

It breaks my heart…

Video Link

Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

By definition, “men” face up to daunting hurdles that if they don’t overcome, they are screwed. This is one, and honestly, it really is only a minor first world problem compared to a lot of stuff that can and has happened in German history.

Who would you rather be, a German dude living today in some comfortable German home or a member of the Wehrmacht 6th Army trapped in the Kessel. Really, if they can’t face up to this, and I don’t mean by violence, this is such a trivial problem, all they have to do is vote out the wrong people and vote in the right people.

If German men are defeated by this, lord knows they deserve it, as sad as it is to say.

In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.

The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

Well, it certainly would be what I would do…

Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about “da eskimos dunnit”. About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I’m not sure one could get that result on Haaretz….

Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

Steve’s got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill – he’s pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the “general public” via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I’ve heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can’t control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve’s shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I’d have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn’t engage at all on that.

Think about this….

Dating a very beautiful woman breeds envy, that’s true. It only happened to me once, that is, escorting a 9 or a 10 I was romantically involved with , so to speak. We were both white though. It was embarrassing to see the amount of unsolicited attention and bad vibes her radiant beauty brought forth. But well worth the hassle in hindsight! For most of my life I’ve dated cute but otherwise ordinary ladies.

I’ve come to the conclusion that beauty in women is a lot like IQ in people, whether male or female. Up to some point, it is almost invariably a positive quality, enhancing life outcomes for the bearer. After that, the correlation starts breaking down.

Above 150 IQ, it is hard to tell what is the need for that level of intelligence, what really tangible life benefit can a rare outlier with a 170 IQ achieve that someone with an IQ of 150 or so cannot.

Similarly, the utility of increasing female beauty more or less maxes out when a women is beautiful enough to make every man who sees her attracted to her enough to do her bidding. Above that point, it just hyperdrives male lust with highly unpredictable effects from this unruly force. And, as you imply at least, it doesn’t help her relations with females, actually harms them with all the envy and such.

It is also hard to make a case that there is any utility to it looking at it from an evolutionary viewpoint. First there are so few at these beauty/IQ levels, if it was overall positive the mean would be shifting there quickly. But it is extremely unusual for such outliers, even with mates who are very high or even at the same level in that quality to have offspring possessing that quality at that level. Very significant regression to the mean for outlying beauty and IQ across a generation.

So really they are just random flukes as much as those with an extreme deficit of IQ or beauty. In those cases, we universally recognize the negativity of the deficit but it is hard to see any negativity on the high side. That is because IQ/beauty is nearly invariably a positive up to some point so we just extrapolate and assume a little more is just more better.

And sometimes it is, but sometimes it isn’t, again, starts becoming random how this combines with other qualities of the person. And since it is random, on occasion the negative effect is so great that the outcomes are worse, and even sometimes far worse, if the person had even been just average on that scale.

The problem is that having such a high degree of some quality likely creates a need for some enhanced qualities in other regards because the bearer is going to be facing some unusual situations that most people don’t and perhaps even on 24/7 basis like a insanely gorgeous woman. So other areas of mentality, personal qualities may need boosting as well, like increased horsepower in an engine requires a better transmission. But there is no assurance that the random occurrence of high IQ/beauty is going to occur accompanied by the requisite skills for managing this IQ/beauty, what other people see as a rare gift. Again, this is because the randomness that produced this rare example is past the point of evolutionary benefit/mechanisms.

To some extent, at least cultural traditions recognize this dilemma even if it isn’t usually obvious to individuals encountering outliers like this. A common narrative theme across the ages has been the potential for tragedy in having one’s dreams come true. A common wish is to have superlative beauty or intelligence. QED.

FWIW, I suspect this dynamic applies to extreme high side outliers for many qualities consistently viewed as positive and in a more is always better way.

Once you throw out the two-sex requirement for mating

Did I do that? I don’t recall that I did in our discussion, but you use it as a necessary premise for all that follows in your response. I’d love to play, but answering straw man arguments is a fools errand…

Funny how “non sequitur” is often used to mean “I can’t think of an answer to your question, so I won’t even try.”

That may or may not be true as a general statement. I would add that I have no opinion other than to note I’ve not observed the same pattern qualified (generally in your favor, incidentally) by the fact that I’ve never looked for or noticed a pattern of such usage.

Regardless, it wasn’t used in this fashion in this particular instance where it quite accurately identifies an indisputable non-sequitur by any measure.

Read what you wrote and think about it carefully and you should understand why it was a non sequitur – critical thinking is hard work, but it can be rewarding when done with strict diligence, at least in my experience.

Take a look at this stuff, a good place to start in improving your debating game – you’ve got a lot of enthusiasm and “gameness”, but you need to tighten up on technique. That is, of course, only if you, perhaps improbably because I know I sound like a d*ckhead to you in at least in this comment, want to keep me interested in discourses with you:

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html

England, however, was a society of reserved, reclusive, eccentric individuals who constantly turned their backs upon one another, but who lived side by side in a common home, respecting the rules and procedures like frosty members of a single club.

I’d go even further and suggest that the anglo-saxon tradition would often have family members treating each other with no more preference accorded than that that would be given any other Englishman. I’d have taken club member, even frosty one, as a significant upgrade. My father’s side was 100% English/American founding stock and this attitude, looking back, was evident in the extreme although it all seemed normal at the time. How it propagated over the generations between England and my generation is debatable, but it was extremely in evidence.

I could go on with a bunch of specific, and at least one rather horrifying, anecdotes, but really my father summed it up with his frequent jest that when a kid turns 18, the locks on the doors will be changed and said offspring shouldn’t be coming back with any little babies and big suitcases.

IMO this lack of family cohesion among WASPs significantly contributed to the eventual loss of their hegemony in the U.S. OT, but I’d add that the three martini lunches, constant tippling, didn’t help much either.

Merkel has vandalized Germany.

I guess karma is a mofo, even if it is 1560 later.

I’m not sure how much the PUA analysis has relevance here.

Me neither, but it seems like many PUA adherents feel its principles are the General Theory Of Everything. Whatever the merits of the belief system in success with women, an unfortunate side effect is the constant explaining of all events through PUA belief prism.

It is another secular religion like SJW left/liberalism, has all the characteristics. The de-Christianizing of the west has all sorts of pseudo-religions popping to fill the vacuum across the political spectrum, not just on the left.

One distinct characteristic is creating extraodinary detailed explanations/rationales presented as revelation that always boil down to some obvious truism.

Here is my distillation of this one:

1) Woman have had an an enormous influence on current events in Germany.

Well, of course they have. In normal populations, they usually comprise ~50% of the population so they of course have enormous effect on any event, just like men do, who comprise the other ~50%. So in Germany, with a presumably normal sex ration, it would be only significant were women not a major, major, like roughly 50% interestingly, part of the influence on what is happening there.

Dog bites man…

2) Women have different motivators and theirs are very distinct from men because of their role in reproduction.

Well, duhh, what largely differentiates men/woman is due to their different roles in reproduction.

Dog bites man…

3) Women through innocent intentions, misplaced trust, and excessive independence, are marching themselves and their men down a path of folly that will result in catastrophe for all.

According to at least one huge religious tradition, this is what kicked off human existence, the founding event.

Dog bites man…

I don’t understand why we can’t all just take these things as givens. My guess is the PUA guys were so propagandized by egalitarian propaganda growing up – it is significant the timeline/age groups where PUA began – that commonplaces about men/women really are revelations to them and they have to keep reiterating them to full supplant the egalitarian brainwashing.

So, maybe is just deprogramming and potentially deserves a little more sympathy. I’d say 2), that men and women are really different is the truly novel proposition to these guys. And the way that PUA treats this former common sense item as the most profound of insights is a testament to how effective the egalitarian brainwashing system has been in recent decades.

I don’t understand German mythos very well but…

The Battle of Stalingrad has much symbolic signficance for a lot of Germans and rightly so IMO. It is kind of downplayed here in the U.S. because of the common belief that the Normandy invasion & followon is what singlehandedly fixed the Germans’ trolley.

The right to drive without speed limits is roughly the analog to the 2d Amendment in the U.S., viewed as a fundamental right of a free people – frei fahrt für freie bürger. Naturally, the wets are on the wrong side of this one.

I can’t think of any Stalingrad angle off-hand, but the surest way to get German men to “drop their cocks and grab their socks” is to get them thinking that “frei fahrt” is under attack, which does happen from time to time.