So, Burzum records robots having a gargling contest?

It’s also possible that his father was not of Jewish origin, and that would have made him even more marginal.

His Father was God.

I’m with Fred on this one. I don’t really like Mexicans or Mexican culture very much at all. I want the border closed and the illegals deported, and a very sharp curtailment to legal immigration. I am proud to be white and I champion Western civilization. I think miscegenation is almost always a mistake.

But with all that being said, HBD is pseudoscience. It is rooted in a mixture of a political movement (the politics of which I largely agree with, by the way) and the arch-pseudosciences of Darwinian evolution and molecular biology, which are things people believe in when they like to think of themselves as intelligent but aren’t. Darwinian evolution and molecular biology are both philosophically untenable disciplines, but nobody understands this because nobody bothers to think about metaphysics anymore.

Oh, and Steve Sailer is a creepy weirdo, not to mention a wuss of a rare caliber.

No, I said what I said about Sailer because it is the truth, and I’ve been saying it for almost ten years now, since long before most of you even heard of Sailer. The proof is readily presented in his own memoirs, reminiscences, and autobiographical asides, should you bother to read them.

And do not condescend me ever again.

Alright, I’ll try to be be specific.

I don’t often read Sailer for the very reasons I mentioned above. In fact, I pretty much tuned him out for many years. But I do read the VDARE website, which brings me into the Sailer orbit since his blogs are often cross-posted there. However, without a determined search, which I would rather not spend the time on today, I’m not going to be able to do much better than rough anecdotes.

For example, I recall a post from years ago on the old iSteve blog in which Sailer was discussing something about testosterone levels among businessmen. The substance of the article involved no departure from the usual Sailerian shtick, but what caught my eye was that Steve described himself as “a low-T kind of guy” who, for that reason, was just not interested in the macho behavior engaged in by young financial professionals. He concluded by observing that women business majors generally convert themselves into supportive helpmates for their alpha-male husbands rather than become business leaders themselves, and that “he had no problem with that.”

There was a lot I found preposterous about the article. I am disgusted by simplistic talk about “alpha male behavior” among human beings, as if we were just some irrational primate species. Even to the extent that such categories are valid, it is the height of absurdity to suppose that they have anything to do with minute variations in serum testosterone levels between individuals. I don’t consider finance to be a particularly alpha-like field to begin with; it is generally more of a sinecure for those with the right credentials. And I’m not sure why anyone would be surprised to learn that women would rather be wives and helpers than business leaders.

With so much nonsense afflicting his judgment, I’m not sure that Steve’s observations concerning himself are empirically accurate in any case. But to be a self-confessed “low-T guy” when he believes higher testosterone levels are necessary for manliness, and to profess no interest in the same behaviors which he himself defines as manly, is tantamount to saying, “I’m not much of a man according to my own standards, but I don’t really care.” There is something fundamentally weird about that. Such an attitude gives me the same queasy felling that straight men used to feel in the presence of homosexuals before gay-norming went mainstream. No pity or mercy should be extended to a creature who will not advance its own cause.

Steve also caters to the grossest stereotypes involving black men and penis size, and in general the role that secondary sex characteristics play in driving miscegenation. Notwithstanding the fact that there is no statistically significant difference between white and black penises, and that even in this day and age miscegenation is rare enough to be considered a nonexistent problem, who the hell spends their time thinking about such things? Is this really the occupation of an adult? Are we to believe that HBD now qualifies as sober, hard-hitting journalism because because Steve has a dot chart showing that black male/white female couples slightly outnumber white male/black female couples?

Now couple all this with Steve’s constant whining about not being allowed to write for the mainstream media. He and his fans would fain believe that this is attributable to his topics being too “edgy” and contrary to the PC narrative. In reality it is because HBD is ridiculous and practically nobody cares about it. HBD is the exclusive concern of a handful of internet weirdos who seem to have motivations which are, to say the least, mysterious;–like Steve Sailor, the self-described wimp who likes to write about black manliness and hang out with Taki; like John Derbyshire, the White Nationalist with the Asian wife.

As far as the alt-right is concerned, HBD (like that other vile three-letter abbreviation, PUA) is a waste of time. A fascination with it is the mark of a loser, a freak, or a hypocrite. It is not at all necessary for the political goals of the movement; and as it is founded on pseudoscientific absurdity, it only makes the rest of us appear that much more ridiculous by association. We had a very successful segregated society for hundreds of years here in America without a trace of HBD entering into the matter. All that’s needed is political realism and genuine (not imaginary) virtue among whites. I’ll take that over gene sequences any day.

Don’t read Fingleton. Read this guy instead. His real name, I believe, is Richard Henty, or something like that, and he has been living and working in Japan for years. This is some of the best homespun journalism I’ve ever seen. I am not exaggerating.

https://spikejapan.wordpress.com/

His assessment of Japan’s socio-economic situation is hopeful, but certainly not positive. In a raft of exquisitely written articles and photographs, he has chronicled the ennui and dilapidation of Japan from Hokkaido to Irizaki to downtown Tokyo. He is also ruthlessly thorough in his research, always making use of published economic and demographic data.

False. Legally or culturally enforced segregation in America has always been accompanied by HBD inspired narratives of native differences between peoples.

I anticipated that argument; and without belaboring the point, I will just say that it illustrates exactly what is wrong with HBD. Obviously, no legal or cultural segregation can exist without some means of discriminating between people. The idea that there are intrinsic differences between (for example) whites and blacks is entirely supported by experience. The experience is so basic and visceral, however, that it is not the sort of thing anybody feels the need to defend unless it is being attacked by an external agency. Then people reach out for “narratives” to help explain what never needed explaining before.

Some of those narratives from the past may have veered into areas currently classified under the heading of biological differences. So what? The point is not that such examples can be found–after all, there were plenty of cranks and pseudoscientists in the past as well. The point is, what significance did those narratives possess? How and why were they received? Did people believe in intrinsic differences because they were convinced by the narrative, or did they buy the narrative only because they already believed in the differences?

The problem with HBD is that it completely elides the distinction between intrinsic differences and biological differences. Being biological determinists, HBDers can conceive of no intrinsic difference that is not biological. They do not do metaphysics.

Also, be wary of assessing strength and courage in people you haven’t met.

Yes, be wary indeed.

I like the “sacred objects” on the girl on the left, but I still think miscegenation is a bad idea.

You’re right. HBD is an advanced neoconservative ideology. It is the butt-end of the alt-right and thankfully will not be with us forever.

I would love to, but it’s a far-ranging and lengthy project. I’m not sure how to advert to something which ought to be common knowledge but isn’t.

Basically, I’m saying that substantial differences must be differences of soul, not of biology. In fact, even to the extent that such differences are reflected in biology, they arise from the immaterial substantial form, i.e. the soul.

Are you familiar with Aristotle? Hylemorphic composition? Have you read De Anima? It’s readily available online, free of charge.

I have to disagree, Mr. Christian. These events are not being forgotten at all. It’s just that most of us have long since realized that it is pointless to argue about it with anyone even tangentially involved with the political-media-academic axis. We can’t talk about it at work (the upper management are all crony capitalists and Cathedral wannabes and so they toe the party line, and set the tone for the rest); we can’t talk about it at school (the Left owns the professoriate); and we can’t talk about it at church (the Left owns the clergy). Therefore we find other ways to express ourselves, e.g. supporting Donald Trump.

The change taking place is mostly unconscious, because a lot of it is still forbidden speech. But someday, those who currently occupy the corridors of power will be gone, and men sympathetic to our views will take their place. The truth will out, for it cannot be hid forever.

Well, if I understand correctly what you’re getting at, I suppose that would be fine, but it would necessarily involve a very different definition of HBD than the one currently in place (especially the ‘B’ part).

Obviously, I believe that there are very real, significant, and intractable physiognomic distinctions between the races; and yes, this is entirely compatible with Aristotelian metaphysics. My main beef here is with Darwinism and molecular genetics, which are not.

I was listening to that show when it aired. Rush Limbaugh has a lot of common sense when it comes to certain subjects, but this nonsense had me doing a double-take-face-palm-WTF.

Rush simply does not understand ISIS or anything else about the mess we made in the Middle East. He does not have much of a grasp on foreign policy whatsoever. And there are at least two other things I can think of that I wish he would shut up about.

1) His Whiggish take on the American Revolution and the US Constitution is, frankly, embarrassing to me as a conservative. He ought to tiptoe into the waters of the Traditional/Perennial Right in order to educate himself, perhaps starting with a mild does like Mel Bradford.

2) He still thinks that Vladimir Putin is nothing but a gangster hellbent on rebuilding the Soviet Union, not understanding that Putin is a strong and competent leader and one of the few hopes of Christian civilization.

Another much needed and pertinent discussion ruined by evolutionary psychology.

This comment is exactly right. Simple, accurate, and to the point. Everything else is just chicken drippings.

The fact of the matter is that Obama hates America, especially white Americans, and all of his policies since day one have been designed to punish, harass, and disinherit them.When he speaks about our laws or principles, he does so not in the spirit in which they were originally conceived, but only to turn them against us.

He needs to be impeached and tried for treason. He has willingly exposed American citizens to deadly enemies and gloated about it. He is a sick, evil, pathetic little POS.

If anybody had the time and resources to devote to the project, it would be a worthwhile effort to put together a documentary consisting of Obama’s speeches and official acts as president, with parallel analysis of news reporting and world events. Then it would be clear how he lied, weaseled, and manipulated things, and how he was ever in the service of a program to crush and weaken the United States. The message will only get clearer over time, as distance brings more objectivity to our appraisal of this man’s disastrous presidency.

Why do the best discussions occur, as in Karlin or Sailer, where no effort is made to suppress or discourage posters because the moderator doesn’t like the way they express their opinions?

Steve Sailer suppresses my comments all the fricking time; and, what’s more, there isn’t even a reason for it. I have not insulted or threatened anybody, I say nothing in a combative tone, and everything I write is on topic and as relevant as I can make it–so much so that I often see other Unz writers echoing my thoughts a day or a week after I wrote them.

But none of this is ever allowed through on Sailer’s blog. I think he just likes to maintain a certain circle-jerk atmosphere typical of condescending, 50-ish, SWPL types latterly converted to HBD as a means of easing their frustrations with life.

“Trump’s luck” seems to be that he describes what is really happening. He says what many other people realize, but which most are too intimidated, cajoled, and bullied to mention. It is the power of reality over the liberal narrative. By contrast, the ability to say the most inapposite, ridiculous, and soon-to-be-invalidated-by-events nonsense could aptly be described as “Obama’s luck.”

And where is Obama, anyway? Anybody remember him? Notice how he seems to have been cut completely out of the loop. The country is now operating without any direct input from the Teleprompter in Chief, and there is a general consensus all along the political spectrum that that’s pretty much just fine.

I would like to see Trump for President and Cruz for AG. I don’t know why more people aren’t talking up this rather obvious synthesis.

Trump would not give Jeb any job in his administration more prestigious than serving carved meat at a pool party, and even that would be an honor.

So you have Clinton taking the climate change, BLM,

I’ve noticed that a great many commentators on Unz are quite upset with the Bureau of Land Management lately. Who knew that those wild horses were so politically controversial?

I have to say that I find the passions and avocations of many of the soi-disant dons of the alt-right to be passing strange. Does anyone else find it odd that Mark Steyn spends his free time cutting cat albums and writing essays on 100 Sinatra songs, and that iSteve readers are having a mostly one-sided and adulatory debate about the relative merits of Old Blue Eyes?

I don’t care about Sinatra. What does this have to do with anything? Parsing the life and legacy of a long-dead crooner is a decidedly First-World pastime undertaken in a decidedly Third-Turning mood, and that just isn’t the world we live in anymore. This is for anther time and place, not for the here and now.

Why is everybody in HBD-land so down on Lewontin all the time? Is it only because his studies have been cited (usually by others) in support of the idea that race is a mere social construction? What if that had not occurred? Would his findings themselves still generate so much animosity?

In this case, both sides of the political divide (i.e. the HBDers and the One-Worlders) are completely wrong about the significance of the cited biology. The fact of the matter is that it is completely immaterial how close or how far apart the races are genetically. DNA does not matter; DNA is not the Holy Grail, or the “Blueprint of Life,” or the End-All-and-Be-All that each political camp is making it out to be. DNA is merely an organ of protein synthesis—and that’s it. It has no explanatory power. Saying that different races have different genetic profiles tells us no more than the readily observed fact that they have different skin tones. Saying that different races have broadly similar genetic profiles tells us no more than the uncontroversial observation that we are, after all, all human. Biological facts can be cited in support of either political position; and as each political position is always underdetermined modulo the biological facts, it should not be surprising that these arguments convince no one who is not already convinced for other reasons.

Now a true man of the Right would never resort to biology in order to make his case that there are intrinsic differences between races that would make it difficult for us to live together in the same society. He would say that these differences are of pulse and direction, of feeling and sentiment, of perception and thought, of values and character, of history and destiny; soul-deep differences that lead to inevitable misunderstanding, conflict, and mutual resentment when forced to coexist in the same space. In short, that these are metaphysical distinctions whose essence is not to be looked for in a test tube but in the substantial forms of the beings themselves. The resort to biology is a weak and unpersuasive argument and is a sign of a lack of the confidence necessary to articulate the real political objective, which can only be re-segregation and White Nationalism.

Furthermore, a man of the Right would condemn out of hand all such scientism, biologism, and Darwinism as being incompatible with reality. It does not harmonize with Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysics, with the Natural Law, with the perennial philosophy, or with Divinely Revealed Truth, and therefore it must be wrong. Darwinism, scientism, and genetic reductionism belong to the black arts of the materialist Left. Instead of militating against these things as befitting a proper Traditionalist, a certain portion of the alt-right have swallowed this poison and morphed into the spavined host of ghouls known as “HBD.”

That race doesn’t matter is only one side of the modern myth. The other side is the equally erroneous belief that molecular genetics do matter.

“Honor thy Father and Mother” is the 4th Commandment, not the 3rd.

There is only one reason why Africa’s population is growing, and it has nothing to do with either lack of birth control or “culture.” It is living off the dividends of the West.

Western medicine, Western technology, Western direct foreign investment, and Western bleeding-heart compassion have allowed the populations of Africa to stop dropping like tse-tse flies and to thrive better than they ever could have on their own. We have been throwing fertilizer on the African continent for over a century now and have bred a veritable plague of humanity. Withdraw that aid, and Africa will collapse back to its pre-Western state.

Birth control is against the law of God and I will never advocate its use anywhere, no matter how great the supposed benefit may be from doing so. Still less would I at all subscribe to the forced or “encouraged” sterilization of an entire continent. However, I very much recommend allowing the whole of Africa to benefit from some benign neglect. The resulting chaos will solve the population problem on its own.

Yeah, we all get that.

There is nothing at all “misleading” about the graph when you understand what information is actually being presented.

Yes, you were wrong about Trump. But your intellectual curiosity and willingness to (perhaps) change your mind when presented with better evidence is a very encouraging sign, and I commend you for it.

The truth about Trump is not always easy to put into words, especially if one intends to be brief and to the point. Many of the commenters and columnists here on Unz have hit upon various aspects of Trump’s appeal with pithy phrases such as “he has common sense,” “he stands up to the PC establishment,” “he defends ordinary Americans,” “he understands scarcity,” etc. One of my favorites, although I forgot who said it first, is “He really is Julius Caesar.”

All of this is true, although it is not always sufficiently explanatory. The essence of Trump is that he is a man of facts and reality, a non-ideologue, and (pace your assertion of megalomania) a non-egotist. His brash style is not the result of braggadocio but of the genuine concern of a true leader. He leads and makes decisions, and he expects to be listened to because he is right; he expects to be respected because his heart is true. It is quite natural that the ruling establishment would accuse Trump of bombast, instability, egotism, ulterior motives, and incompetence, because those are the very qualities that they possess and must perforce dissimulate before others. Trump in fact is the very opposite of all those things.

Trump is Julius Caesar. The establishment are Brutus and Cassius.

Trump is like Jesus Christ. The establishment are the Pharisees.

Trump is Vladimir Putin. The establishment are the oligarchs.

If you can read deeply into the historical import of these proffered examples, you will come to understand both the appeal of Trump and the nature of the black forces arrayed against him. The Man of Truth is always attacked by the petty potentates and money-powers of the day, who maintain their artificial advantages by force and fraud, and who (with startling hypocrisy) accuse the Man of Truth of the very same sins that they themselves commit.

In further point of Trump’s rhetorical style, it needs to be pointed out that real leaders are not accustomed to talk much about what they intend to do, and the very act of being forced to submit long, wonkish explanations of their actions for the approval of their spiritual inferiors is itself an insult to their honor. Only “politicians” in the modern mold are apt to be wonky, or to care about their image, or to lie and beguile others in order to advance their own cause. This is all sickeningly and indescribably “beta.” Trump’s “alpha-ness,” by contrast, is attractive precisely because it is firm and solid and without guile. It doesn’t try to attract; it is attractive. And it is no mere affectation either; it is the stripes and scars of a veteran pack-leader.

As I said, it is difficult to put into words. But do you see a pattern building up here? Trump is an admirable and virtuous man, a phronesi, a condottieri. He is the kind of leader America has been lacking for arguably the last 20 years, with what results we see.

Remember that in the heyday of the USSR—i.e. the ’50s, ’60s, and ’70s—the global economy was also growing a lot faster and things generally existed on a more realistic foundation. At that point the debt situation of the Western nations did not look quite as dire as it does now, and the confluence of technological advancement and favorable demographics meant that the world was primed for high living standards.

That whole era is pretty much over now. Post-Soviet Russia has had to engineer its “recovery” amidst an atmosphere of stagnant or declining global growth.

George Will has absolutely no sense of history at all, yet he bastardizes the discipline by writing in an explicitly historicist fashion. He likes to string a bunch of cherry-picked anecdotes together in order to create the impression that “this has all happened before,” and that history has already validated his position as the one that will inevitably be proved correct after the dust of the day settles—and yet the deep logic of time and destiny escape him. It is a typical bright schoolboy tactic: By merely referring to long-buried incidents that most people don’t even know about let alone understand, he attempts to fool his audience into believing he has really grokked the subject, that he’s spent many hours poring over dusty tomes and arriving at rare insights, and can speak with all clarity as to what the future holds.

In reality it is but the adolescent psychology of an 8th-grader who’s learned how to titillate and impress his teachers with superficial displays of intellectualism. There is no meaningfulness in any of George Will’s anecdotes. Constructions like “the GOP’s third epochal intra-party struggle in 104 years” are not substantive historical designations like “the Peace of Vienna” or “the Age of Rembrandt” (which, to the historically literate reader, immediately suggest a fully connotated form-world with a recognizable style and spirit), but empty word-fluffery designed to bolster the goal-seeked end. Will’s columns over the years have been nothing but an endless cavalcade of such contrivances, which itself testifies to the fact that it is only under the relentless pressure of dissimulation that his “party” can maintain even the pretense of a coherent philosophy.

Trump is exactly the opposite. He is a man of few and often inelegant words, but he feels the import of the moment. He sees precisely what is going on and he knows what to do about it. For this reason, I don’t doubt that cucks like George Will really do perceive him as a threat; he is about to blow their entire fantasy world to smithereens. But the delusion that they’re laboring under—cucks like George Will, Rich Lowry, Mike Rosen—that they represent the heart and soul of something called conservatism, is well worthy to be dispelled. They are a minuscule fraction of the population whose beliefs resonate with absolutely nobody. And beyond that, they are the propaganda arm of that synthesis of big government liberalism and crony capitalism which has come to dominate the modern era and which is Trump’s true target.

I cannot say this enough times: We are Rome; Trump is Julius Caesar; the money-powers are Brutus and Cassius and the cucks are their apologists. This is no mere metaphor, but a literal description of the age we live in.

Fred Reed repeatedly says that ordinary Mexicans in Mexico are decent, clean, charming people. I fully believe him when he says this.

The problem is, that description doesn’t square very well with my experience of “Hispanics” in America, the majority of whom are human trash. They are at best buffoons, and often perpetual liars, backstabbers, and criminals.

I’m beginning to think that both of us are right, and that the Mexicans who stay in Mexico are somehow different from the Mexicans that come to America.

This is currently a featured article, and having to look at a playing card-sized portrait of this hollow-eyed Stepford bimbo on the Unz homepage is starting to creep me out.

In America, our notion of ourselves as a “propositional nation” is very strongly embedded. What this means in practice is that things like race, gender, social class, creed, and national origin are not allowed to count for anything. Only the individual’s assent to “rational,” “universal” propositions determines his destiny; this is how the myth is maintained. We produce one successful middle-class black person out of a thousand, and we consider the myth validated. We don’t look at the 999 failed cases as evidence to the contrary. Obviously those cases just didn’t believe hard enough, or were held back by white racism.

This exclusive emphasis on the individual’s assent to rational propositions can be traced back to John Locke and Immanuel Kant, whose ideas passed into the very founding of America by way of Montesquieu and Voltaire. That vaunted “rugged individualism” that Americans pride themselves on is really just the old Enlightenment cult of reason with a Puritanical varnish. One is reminded of Kant’s maxim that “even a republic of devils could be moral as long as they kept their reason.”

Protestantism, Puritanism, Rationalism, and finally PC liberalism, are not different belief systems but successive stages on the path leading away from revealed Truth and perennial philosophy, and toward social disintegration.

To accept any part of this sequence means, eventually, to accept the remainder. To myth of American Exceptionalism necessarily entails PC liberalism. That is why it is so frustrating to see so-called “conservatives” like Rush Limbaugh (who really does have a lot of common sense on some subjects) continue to tout the US Constitution and the American tradition of “individual liberty” as the answer to the PC garbage when really they are the cause of it.

The Constitution is not our ally here. Propositional notions of liberty and human rights are not grounded in reality—they are fantastical and absurd. What’s needed is a real metaphysical faith, a pure and unabashed view of reality, and actions backed up by strength and honor.

That was one of the pithiest and best comments of all time.

I am going back to the science blogs where people talk sense to each other.

You mean like Global Warming, Darwinian Evolution, Inflationary Cosmology?

Yup. Perfect sense.

I, too, think Ilana Mercer is a bit off the beam with this column. I’d still like to slip her the sausage though.

I’m a white man, and I stand up to blacks all the time. In fact, I’ve even had to go into the ghetto and take care of business with certain blacks that even the other blacks couldn’t take care of. My job requires me to do that sort of thing from time to time. A tall and well-built white man in a uniform will pretty much get compliance from blacks and Mexicans as long as he stands his ground. I’ve learned this from experience.

And I take serious issue with the notion that Barack Obama has “brass balls.” The only time Obama has balls is when he’s got someone else’s sack in his mouth. He is a petulant homosexual who walks around with an arrogant sneer simply because nobody has ever opposed him in his life. Everybody bent over for the magic negro, but that’s not going to happen anymore.

I’ve known all along what that POS was all about. I was saying it way back in 2006 when the idea of his presidential run was first mooted. Very few people listened to me then, and it’s a pity that it has taken so long for significant numbers of Americans to wake up. However, the day is coming when he will meet with the wrath of the American people…and the God he’s continuously mocked.

Obama is a rogue president who is out of control and must be stopped. He hates white people with a bitter, burning, envious rage and he wants to gloat over us while we suffer and die, all the while playing the part of the magic negro in order to convince the white useful idiots to give him as much power as he asks for.

First he wants to beat us down both psychologically and economically, saddling us with confiscatory taxation, Obamacare, and stifling regulations of every kind imaginable. Then he imports millions of foreigners (murderous Muslims and worthless Mexicans) to destroy the fabric of our civil society. Next, he wishes to disarm us and make it impossible for us to legally purchase weapons wherewith to defend ourselves. After that, he will pardon hordes of black criminals out of our prisons and quarter them upon us with his “disparate impact” zoning regulations. This is to say nothing of the mess he’s made of foreign policy.

It is obvious at this point that Obama is a threat to the well-being of the nation. His presidency needs to end immediately, and at this point I no longer care how it ends. He needs to be investigated and prosecuted for treason. He needs to meet with the justice he deserves, and ordinary Americans need to be freed from the yoke of his petulant homosexual tyranny.

Virility does not seem to be the issue, but it shows the limitations of looking at this from a materialistic perspective. If you’re a materialist, then only genes, hormones like testosterone, innate characteristics, or similar material factors can possible account for the seeming loss of virility of Europeans – typical materialist solution = put testosterone in the water.

Yet even from a materialist perspective, it is impossible that European males can have changed so dramatically in so few generations. Furthermore, Asian who are widely considered to be effeminate and intrinsically non-virile peoples among those who think things like testosterone and hormones and other material factors are the most important factors that account for personality, yet Asians – the least virile people from a materialist perspective – have no trouble showing the “back bone” to defend themselves, stand up for themsleves, etc.

Yet despite the incoherence and self-contradictions of the materialist viewpoint, they seem at a loss to offer different explanations because non-materialist explanations are a priori ruled out. So they stumble in the dark saying silly, incoherent things (Europeans are wimps because of less testosterone, but Asians with even less testosterone have no problem standing up for their culture and people, etc etc – you get the picture)

The answers aren’t hard to come by. Muslims are religious, Europeans are materialist hedonists whose main concern is to maximize pleasure – how would it be possible for Europeans to resist? The crisis is one of motivation – not virility. Even today, in Holland or Germany, local men are much larger and more muscular than the “virile” Muslims, and American white men are also much more formidable than Hispanics, who are physically small and often hairless and effeminate looking.

Derbyshire is a secular materialist whose emotions and sentiments have not caught up with his rational brain – in other words his emotions contradict his world view. As a secular materialist, he cannot have any reason to sacrifice short term hedonic pleasure to fight Muslims and other invaders, yet he has sentimentally kept enough of his religious outlook to wish to do so. Derbyshire is a “transitional” generation – often, the first generation that leaves religion keeps enough social, intellectual, and moral capital to avoid the worst kinds of degeneration.

You’re 100% right of course, and Derbyshire and Sailer are a couple of spiritually spavined fruitcakes who have no realistic solutions to offer.

I am freaking sick and tired of pseudo-scientific horseshit like “evolutionary psychology” and “the Manosphere” tainting discussion of this vitally important issue.

Do you, John Derbyshire, really think that this is all happening because German girls are getting their panties wet over a bunch of snotty Syrian doofuses? That’s ridiculous. In fact, it’s beyond ridiculous. It’s moronic, it’s stupid, and it’s false.

Where are these women? Show me these German girls who harbor a secret fascination with Middle Eastern idiots. Go ahead and explain to me how, compelled by forces they can neither control nor understand, they simply must jump into bed with backward, barely-literate desert rats, and then explain to me how this desire somehow translates into the complex political actions undertaken by Germany to actually bring the foreigners in.

Mathew2 has already indicated some of the real forces at work here, and there is no need for e to type what he said again, only to second it. But the sooner the Sailerites and PUAs are torched out of the alt-right, the better.

Save it. They’re no allies of mine.

It does not–like too many Christians do today–declare that “we Muslims and Christians pray to the same god.” For such an assertion flies not only in the face of 1,300 years of history, but also of the orthodox teachings and doctrines of both the Holy Bible and the Quran.

That very same declaration, Dr. Cathay, is now enshrined in the loathsome Vatican II document Nostra Aetate, currently held to be the de fide teaching of the Universal Church by the man you call Pope Francis and the prelates in communion with him. Clearly the institutional structure of the Catholic Church apostatized at the Second Vatican Council and is no longer of the faith. It is time for a man of your obvious intelligence and faithfulness to begin thinking—and thinking seriously—of embracing Sedevacantism.

Hello Fred,

Perhaps your Aristotle-reading wife would enjoy explaining to you his proofs that the intellect is immaterial, thus not the result of genetics. It may be an interesting conversation for both of you. And then you can stop worrying about the possibility of such genetic engineering, which I can assure you is never, ever going to happen.

Ted Cruz has a rather phlegmatic personality that would not work well in the Oval Office. His Rainman-like feats of excogitation (“Senator Rubio, let me explain to you why, of the 347 syllables you just spoke against me, only 122 of them are true”) may score him points in the court room, but that is not the proper function of a Commander in Chief.

Plus, he looks like Bronson Pinchot doing a Pee-wee Herman impersonation.

Donald Trump is the man.

When it comes to the Iran deal, I think Donald Trump is criticizing the awfulness of the deal itself, not the general point of achieving detente with Iran. Trump does not share the neocons’ belief that Iran is an Axis-of-Evil basket case of a country that cannot be dealt with rationally and for mutually beneficial ends.

We all know why Obama did the particular Iran deal he did. Obama will take any opportunity that he can find to stick it to ordinary American people. He thinks that normal, white Americans are reflexively opposed to dealing with Iran, which alone is sufficient reason for him to do it. He also believes that by strengthening a Muslin nation, he will empower the greater Islamic hordes to eventually destroy the western world, and he wants Iranian oil on the market drive prices down and beat down America’s oil industry. He just wants to hurt us; his proffered rationals are merely pretexts.

But things are not going to go as planned. You’re familiar with the Tolkienian maxim, “An evil will oft evil mars,” aren’t you? The fact of the matter is that most Americans would be perfectly happy with an Iran deal, as long as it was a good deal. Pat Buchanan, for instance, has long been in favor of such a thing, and nobody can accuse him of being unpatriotic.

All Trump is saying is that he wants to redo the deal such that it doesn’t stick it to American citizens or American national interests.

I think almost everybody who regularly reads Unz actually wishes the FBI would have taken down king when they had the chance.

Happy Magic Negro Day.

The purpose of religion is to save souls and prepare them for eternity. This point often gets overlooked by those who rightly recognize that the Christian (Catholic, not Protestant) religion is also responsible for producing the strongest civil society the world has ever seen, and that the decline of religion has gone hand-in-hand with the decline of society.

Asian people are not really doing well. China, Japan, and Korea all have sub-replacement birthrates and are suffering from the modernist anomie in one way or another. They do have a salvageable cultural machinery in place, but they need Christianity as much as anyone.

“War is the father of all things.”
–Heraclitus

Those words have lived for 2400 years, and will still be around when MLK is a deservedly forgotten footnote.

Uh…hello? Ever read the Divine Comedy? Ever heard of the nine choirs of angels? Ever read St. Paul ( 2 Corinthians 12:2 “I saw a man in Christ who fourteen tears ago was caught up to the third heaven…”)? Ever read Aristotle or Ptolemy? What do you think the word “quintessence” means?

Every believing Catholic (and the virtuous pagan Greeks) has a hierarchical view of heaven because heaven is hierarchical.

It’s a good thing we have intellectual giants like you here at the alt-right to help us preserve the treasures of Western Civilization.

Glenn Beck is a mystic. Not only is he completely enamored with the whole Straussian-Neocon-Fukuyamian worldview, he thinks he has received a special commission from God to go forth and preach it. He also spends an inordinate amount of time obsessing about the so-called crimes of the Nazis (as if that horse hasn’t already been beaten to death and then some).

He is the closest example I’ve ever seen of a “prophet.” I’m using that word metaphorically so as not to insult the real prophets of the Christian tradition. What I mean to say is that he is a true and absolutely irremediable believer in establishment cuckservativism.

Capitalism has never killed a single solitary person, not because it is virtuous but because it isn’t really an “ism.” Thus it has no organizational structure, no partisans, no means of action, and no ability to do anything.

That is also why it continues to lose to Socialism, despite the manifest superiority of non-Socialist, Western economies like what the United States used to have. Socialism, despite being evil, is at least a Something; Capitalism is a Nothing, at best a gentleman’s agreement to not go full oligarchy (an agreement moreover which apparently is no longer in effect).

In order to combat Socialism what’s needed is not a “market” but a strong ruler who wields a sword of justice to suppress economic gangsterism in all its forms. The free market, for all of its beneficial effects, is still really just a gift from such rulers. Free markets cannot exist without law and order.

Yes, of course. I have a great fondness for the Old Testament and I read it almost every day.

I could have been more clear by saying “Biblical tradition,” but I am an old-school Roman Catholic and I thought that might make me sound too protty.

Fuck your “peace-be-upon-him.”

I was very thrilled to hear Rush quote Sam Francis on his show the other day. Rush’s audience is often estimated at about 20 million listeners. If even 1 in 100 of those is curious enough to google Sam Francis or “alt-right,” that’s 200,000 more people at least getting acquainted with the message.

I also agree with Kirkpatrick that there are some bridges Rush will (unfortunately) never cross. He’s too committed to the ideas that Russia and Iran are evil countries, that the US Constitution is a grand old document guaranteeing “liberty”, that America is an exceptional nation, that free-market capitalism triumphs over everything, and pretty much a whole raft of establishment conservative notions. It’s almost painful to listen to him sometimes. He gets so close. He’s knocking on the door but he won’t come in.

I am amazed—not with surprise but with admiration—at how all of Trump’s so-called controversial comments turn out to have been right on the money in retrospect. For instance, take his quip about McCain to the effect of “he’s only a war hero because he got caught.” This is precisely correct. McCain’s military career prior to being captured was hardly a standout performance. He was at best a war hero only in the generic sense that every wartime veteran is occasionally draped with hero’s accolades. He leveraged his time as POW to cast himself as a great pro-American fighting man, and Trump cut right through all that nonsense.

As an example more germane to the current article, we have Trump’s remark that Cruz “acted like a maniac” when he got to the Senate. This is also correct. As I have commented before, Ted Cruz has an ultra phlegmatic temperament that works well in the schoolroom or the courtroom, but does not work well in the stateroom. He is a thoroughgoing ideologue who does not know how to lead or to get things done, only how to spout wonkish soundbites and build them into an increasingly unhinged crescendo of platitudinous insistence—rather like Barack Obama. Ted Cruz would make an ineffectual and disastrous president, and it’s time those of us on the alt-right stopped condescendingly extending him the mantle of conservatism. Thankfully James Kirkpatrick and Ann Coulter have already done so.

And a petulant, envious, self-confessed fag.

For what it’s worth, I predict the Patriots will defeat the Broncos today but will lose the Superbowl to Arizona. Either way, neither Brady nor Manning are getting another ring this season.

That’s exactly what we’ve been saying all along.

Dr. Cathay, this is a great and brilliant article. I think very much the same way about Trump. You have gotten to the heart of the matter by correctly apprehending that Trump actually represents traditional conservative values, and that the Neocons are terrified of that. Once again, Trump is Julius Caesar and the Neocons are Brutus and Cassius.

I’ll also take the time here to reiterate my observation that Ted Cruz looks just like Bronson Pinchot doing a Pee-wee Herman impersonation. The contrasting physiognomy between Trump and Cruz is rather telling, I think.

Welcome to the bizarre world of John Derbyshire, who obsessively calculates that Sarah Palin says the phrase “make America great again” an average of once every two minutes and fifty seconds, and who speaks of alpha males and fertility goddesses in an explicitly metaphorical sense while trying to convey the impression that they are no mere metaphors.

Derb has never shaken off (and evidently will never shake off) his underlying Cartesian, Darwinist, historicist, and quite typically British metaphysical errors, not realizing that these are the very sources of the problems he decries. He attempts to plant himself firmly on the alt-right, but he brings with him the whole intellectual seedbed of liberal ideology.

Traditional conservatism means nothing if not at least a correct view of metaphysical reality. This is furnished by classic Catholic Scholasticism, i.e. Aristotelian-Thomism in the natural and speculative sciences and perennialism in the political-social sphere. It is something light-years apart from—and opposed to—the Darwinite-quant ululations of twits like Sailer and Derb.

Pretty clearly what’s occurring here is that the battle in the political sphere for the soul of the Republican party, between Trump’s Buchananite populism and the Neocons’ international Zio-capitalism, is being mirrored in the semantic sphere by an increasingly Talmudic discussion of what the real meaning of “conservatism” is. Thankfully, both politics and semantics are very much on the side of the Trumpster. With each passing day the National Review-style Republicans are being exposed for the minority occupation, Left-lite cabal they always have been.

True conservatism, while difficult to define in a denotative manner, can at least be fairly straightforwardly described as that which stands in opposition to Empire (as over against organic national politics), abstract intellectual values (e.g. multiculturalism, the “Rights of Man,” even democracy itself), and money as a political force. In these respects, not only is Trump very much a true conservative, he is a deeply died and richly textured one at that.

We have not really entered the 21st century yet. Right now, in 2016, we are still living in the long coda of the 20th century, the last chapter of the Great War saeculum. The Trump campaign and its resounding popularity is very much a fin-de-siecle phenomenon which will close the books on that historical aberration known as “the American century” once and for all.

He will make America great again, but it will be great and quiet instead of great and bellicose—a Tokugawa America. I like the sound of that.

You really are a flaming retard, you know that?

Dr. Cathey is Roman Catholic, and neither he nor Donald Trump have ever voiced any support for foreign interventionism.

There were Jews in camps, yes, but they weren’t “death” camps and their purpose was not extermination. By the time Germany was finally defeated, the whole economy was a shambles and starvation and disease were taking their toll on everyone. The prisoners in the camps were naturally among the worst off.

It must have been horrible, but it wasn’t a “holocaust.”

Donald Trump dominated the debate without even attending it. He smoked everyone with his veterans’ rally, which looked like a lot of fun and raised over six million dollars. Opposite him over at FOX, the two Cubans and the special-needs adult were arguing with each other over who was the bigger Latin lover.

And Ross Douthat looks for reasons?

I have to marvel at Divine Providence.

The unusual spelling of Megyn Kelly’s first name is itself the perfect metaphor for her whole personality.

First there’s the “Me,” as in “It’s all about ME, Megyn Kelly.”

And then there’s the “gyn.” Gyn as in gynecological. As in “I am Megyn, hear me roar.” As in “she had blood coming out of her whatever.”

Megyn Kelly is a vacuous and voluminous ego with a female life support system.

My professor of British literature was 150% Irish, and he was the spitting image of Andrew Breitbart.

I’ve never thought she was that pretty either. For some reason, I don’t find any of the “hot” girls on the cable news networks to be very pretty. Yes, they are sometimes attractive in a purely cosmetic way, but they are lacking in certain essential qualities that really capture the heart. And even had this not been the case, their entitled, girl-power, stuck up attitudes would have totally killed it for me. Her are some of the things I don’t like.

1) They all dress like whores. The girls on FOX News wear skirts that go three-quarters of the way up their thigh, such that they have to keep their legs scrupulously crossed to avoid giving you the money shot. That, combined with their high heels and heavily applied eyeliner make them look like they’re on their way to a night club. Who told them that this was a professional way to present themselves?

2) They’re all feminists. If the FOX girls are supposed to be conservatives, they are the kind of conservatives who believe that the liberals had it right up until about 10 years ago, but now it’s time to put the breaks on and conserve something. By their very career choice, not to mention their attitudes, actions, and opinions, they demonstrate that they are just fine with the progressive trends of modern society.

3) They’re all giggly idiots. These women are vacuous, not very intelligent, immature, and unprofessional on the air. They act like they are there to have fun and amuse themselves. They don’t have the gravity to do serious news and analysis.

Ironically, the one FOX girl who frequently defies these categories, who is actually good looking, professional, intelligent, truthful, and who dresses well, is Kirsten Powers…and she is the freakin’ liberal!

Could you elaborate a bit on that?

If you mean that they are conscious of losing their youth, that their bodies are changing, that their biological clocks have ticked down to 0:00 and their child-bearing days are over, that they either are now or shortly will be no longer attractive in the conventional sense—then yes, I can see how that would be difficult. But I’m not sure what that has to do with Megyn Kelly being douche-canoe on national television and attempting to sully Trump for no reason.

If Congress were completely irrelevant, then Obama wouldn’t have to circumvent them with executive actions and regulatory expansion. Congress could make itself a lot more relevant by cutting off the spending, but they have shown no appetite for the fight.

I would have liked to tube-steak a younger Nancy Pelosi, not that that’s apropos of anything.

Ted Cruz would be appointed to blow kazoos at the seagulls.

May I just say that I am thoroughly sick and tired of this meme going around—now found in the mouths of callers-in to radio talk shows, influential members of the media, and even presidential candidate Jeb Bush himself—to the effect of, “If Donald Trump can’t handle questions from Megyn Kelly, how’s he gonna handle Putin?”

We may recall that it was Kelly herself who initiated this little quip the day after the first FOX debate, when Trump gave her the dressing down she so richly deserved. I don’t doubt that in the imaginary universe that exists in Kelly’s mind (the one that revolves around her) the notion that Trump is afraid of her has some truth value. In the real world, however, it is devoid of substance; and it is quite telling that the rest of the Republican Beta Brigade would latch on to and repeat little miss Megyn’s bit of self-flattering fiction. By doing so they have demonstrated not only weakness but a lack of any respect for truth.

In the first place, Trump is not afraid of Megyn Kelly. Not in any way, shape, or form.

In the second place, Putin does not need to be “handled.” Vladimir Putin is an immensely gifted leader and an Orthodox Christian who has never threatened the interests of the American people. He is a threat only to the Anglo-Zionist Neoconservative Empire. I’m sure Trump and Putin would get along just fine. For the Beta Brigade to use Putin as a stock villain is only a sort of moral preening meant to dog-whistle the support of reflexively anti-Russian GOP voters of the elderly, working class demographic—the very people the party has been throwing under the bus for decades now. It isn’t going to work anymore. Those people are either dead, indifferent, disgusted, or voting Trump.

The dastardliness here is so obvious that it’s almost subtle and easy to overlook, but it is so decisive that it has to be called out and brought into focus. When Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush accuse Donald Trump of being afraid of Megyn Kelly, they are saying something that they damn well know is not even true and are doing so by entering beta-like into the fictional self-importance of the current it-girl while demonizing the strongest and best Christian leader the world has on offer.

Are these really the men we want for president?

The O.J. Simpson murder case was a luridly formative / confirmatory event in the development of the iSteve worldview.

And not just the iSteve worldview. I have long believed that the Simpson murder trial, beginning with the nationally televised white bronco chase, marked the decisive moment when the news media came into their own as the shapers of public thought and the priest-purveyors of infotainment-propaganda, and therefore at the same time a substantial change was wrought at the most fundamental level of our culture.

Up until that point we were still a nation of civilized adults. Despite whatever social problems may have existed, the heart and soul of the historic American nation was still salvageable. After OJ, it was just a matter of time until it all fell apart.

I was only 13 at the time, but I remember feeling that something I had known and believed in was fading away. The three big events of that year—the OJ Simpson trial, the death of Nixon, and the Oklahoma city bombing—will forever mark for me the transition from feeling like I belonged to something to feeling like an outsider in my own country.

my contribution, and commendation of this article.
—–
about a Krugman article in jewyorktimes:

—–
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 8:54 PM
Subject: Fw: NYTimes.com: more on….”Potemkin Ideologies” from the Krug-man

There is far more to think about than what the thin soup analysis of Krugman provides. Here is the wiki definition of a Potemkin Village which comes from Russian history.

“In 1787, as a new war was about to break out between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, Catherine II with her court and several ambassadors made an unprecedented six-month trip to New Russia. The purpose of this trip was to impress Russia’s allies prior to the war. To help accomplish this, Potemkin set up “mobile villages” on the banks of the Dnieper River. As soon as the barge carrying the Empress and ambassadors arrived, Potemkin’s men, dressed as peasants, would populate the village. Once the barge left, the village was disassembled, then rebuilt downstream overnight” for the next show the following day.

So the term is used to denote a fake situation, position, etc. Here is more Krugman. After stating that the Democratic Party has a pretty much clearly stated program, and that there is little difference between its players, he says this about the Republican Party:

“What we’re seeing on the Republican side, by contrast, is that almost nobody except a handful of pundits and think-tank hired guns cares at all about the official party ideology.” That seems to be true and the reason for that is that while the Demogogic Party basically has a racial agenda for blacks and browns, and asians, etc., the Repugnicans have not needed an agenda, certainly not a Conservative agenda ( conservative meaning old traditional values of country, religion, family/marriage, hard work, and small -is-beautiful) because the GOP cares not a whit for these things, but just money-making and Individualism. By doing next to nothing, these money oriented “values” take care of themselves and the thing just chugs along or the Invisible Hand pretty much runs the economic show without much gov’t meddling, except for basic trade rules, and something to keep things going smoothly…in other words, The Fed.

Because the US is a commercial culture, lacking European Tradition and values of high culture, etc. a politics of commerce works well enough until economic conditions get bad, or race problems get bad.

Now that economics and race are becoming problematic, the Repugnicans find themselves with no real philosophy of government that can address these issues. The GOP has me-tooed it on race equality and gender equality issues. They are no different than the Dems. Across the board they have become almost as liberal as the Dems….thus the term “cuckservative” has been coined by the racial right to insult the GOP. It has been cuckholded by the liberals.

So, the Potemkin Village here is a GOP Program or ideology that 1, is almost the same as the Dems, and 2, it has no sense of what’s happening to this country, or what Trump’s populism is all about. The GOP has been blind-sided by reality, economic immiseration for most whites and a consequent severe reaction against globalization, and racial turmoil too, which has been long in coming, but after 50 years of black failure, the End Times are nigh.

The GOP’s ideology is the Potemkin Village: useless, untethered to social, racial and economic reality. They have hit the Wall, now that the Wall has suddenly erupted after years of untheorized and unseen growth, hidden by both smokescreens of TV and Potemkin Rainbows as well as White relative affluence that could shrug off the costs of carrying blacks and browns on welfare, affirmative actions, quotas, etc. Now that Resource Competition sets in grimly with reduced living standards for Whites, the shine is coming off the Big Words of racial equality, Human Rights, and the alphabet soup of democratic isms, queer, etc. rights, and so on, and on.

Populism, nativism, blood and soil, White rights to the countries that they/we have built….that is the common sense today of most Whites, including lots of liberals who dare not say what is on their minds.

What our new Populism will mean will be worked out in the coming few years, and its first characteristic will be very negative. Get these non-whites the hell out of here, give us our country back, our neighborhoods safe again, our schools safe again, and White Civilization restored. As Senator Vail in the immigration act politics of the 1920s said, “if there is any changing to be done in our country, we are going to do it and nobody else.” My gloss would be: and certainly no goddamn jews and niggers are going to change it.

If you want a theory for this new populism, call it racialism, patriotism, familyism and personal restraint, and do not forget law and order. No Potemkin Villages here, just the real thing, with tough white men running the show. Yeah, the Patriarchy Restored, with the ladies safely back in the kitchen and bedroom. No more crazy ladies voting for Billary. May need to give their voting rights some attention.

Joe Webb

The Traditional Roman Catholic Church, which both Dr. Cathey and I belong to, rightly rejected the heresy of Americanism in the person of Pope Leo XIII, and it was we who kicked the Mohammadan precursors of ISIS’ asses at Lepanto, Vienna, and Tours.

Go peddle your whiggish BS somewhere else. Monarchy and theocracy are precisely what real conservatism is all about.

The difference, dude, is that America provided the money via the Marshall Plan to jump start the European economy after WWII and America has been providing the security umbrella for Europe ever since. Those northern European countries were not required to spend any money on their own defense or even to think realpolitik at all. They were free to build themselves little socialist utopias while somebody else did all the heavy lifting. Northern Europe is basically a sanitized laboratory condition that exists behind a cordon of American money and muscle.

As much as I hate the American Empire and wish to see it collapse, I know that it’s disappearance entails the end of a great many other things, one of them being the Pax Europa.

It is baffling that so many people speak as if Darwinism were true when it can be handily refuted by first principles. You don’t even need to provide a long foray into biochemical complexity as Fred has done. Aristotle demonstrated the falsity of Darwinism about 2300 years avant la lettre.

Somebody needs to forward this information to Sailer and the HBD crowd. They are constantly banging away about “evolution this” and “evolution that.” What happens to all their patiently constructed theories when you realize that evolution simply doesn’t exist?

and the reality on the ground is somewhat more complicated than westerners would like to grant.

I agree with that completely.

I gather that the main criticism of Hitler among the more sophisticated far-right German intellectuals at the time was that he was a Heldentenor—an opera star—and not a real leader, but they nevertheless gave their begrudging support to the Nazi party because it was tapping into some legitimate social and intellectual currents.

Stalin seems to have had a valid relationship with the peoples of the Soviet Empire and his actions were within the historical traditions they were familiar with, even if he was atypically heavy-handed and ferocious.

Don’t worry about DVRing it. It will live forever on Youtube.

The most unapologetically black football team in history goes down in defeat to the most unambiguously white quarterback in the league.

Regardless of what you think about the game itself, every alt-righter should be feeling about two inches taller tonight.

Trey Gowdy got housed by Hillary Clinton at the Benghazi hearings in what should have been a lead pipe cinch. Not exactly a great résumé enhancer.

I agree with you about Cruz, however not with regard to the theocracy angle. I don’t want Ted Cruz anywhere near a Trump administration. He is revealing himself more and more to be a conniving, dishonest sleazebag.

He meant Sub-Saharan Africans (SSA).

You would think a website full of readers extolling the high IQs of European whites would be able to quickly decode those simple initials, especially given that it concerns their favorite bete noire (pun intended) subject and that the context of the post made it rather obvious anyway what he was referring to. Alas…

As someone who never really “got” baseball myself, I’d have to say that it’s more of a complete cultural experience than just a sport. It’s the history, it’s the stats, it’s the dogs and the beer, and it’s the never-ending conversation. It isn’t for nothing that baseball is known as the Great American Pastime. That’s literally what it is—the great McGuffin of daily life.

I was never acculturated into that milieu, so I can’t really be a participant. It is what it is, but it makes me a little sad sometimes.

I’ve noticed that I’m not squat for endurance running all by itself. When I try to go out for a jog, I get winded after two blocks. But when I play soccer, I can easily run through the whole game and not even notice it.

Something about being “in the game” changes me enough, psychologically and physiologically, to completely reprogram my body’s endurance abilities. The game is a purposeful activity in a way that simply running down the street is not.

Skin color and DNA sequences are both equally physical manifestations of the reality of race. There is nothing magical about DNA, but most people can’t break the habit of thinking about it as if it were some kind of ghost in the machine. It is not a ghost in the machine. In fact, it’s not even the machine. It is simply an organ system like the digestive tract—the system responsible for protein synthesis—whose workings should not be considered any more mysterious than the latter just because it is microscopic.

Race is first and foremost a spiritual reality. It is derivatively a biological reality. Both are malleable within certain limits, but the situation is extremely complicated and the degree of blinking away racial realities demanded by our current social structure has already reached and exceeded the limits of malleability. It’s time to stop now.

For those without a titanic and saintly self-discipline, the internet is basically a time-wasting extravagance and an expensive one to boot. The existence of the physical IT infrastructure which makes the internet possible depends on an enormous investment of physical capital and social cohesion which is disintegrating under the very pressures which the internet is in part enabling.

What’s more, mere exposure to different musical genres and books does not result in one becoming “sophisticated.” Sophistication implies belonging to the cultural milieu which produces and inwardly understands such things. Sophistication requires tradition—otherwise the appropriation of cultural goods is just cargo cultism, dilettantism, profanation, and theft.

PCR is obviously insane. Why Unz continues to publish this trash is a mystery. I still think it’s a revenge plot.

In the long view, Europe will eventually be Russified and re-Christianized by Russia, and it will be Russia and her proxies that expel the Muslims from Europe. Soros and McCain have it exactly backwards.

I first noticed that Scientific American had jumped the shark about 20 years ago, what with their articles becoming increasingly political and increasingly devoid of critical thinking. I specifically remember from that era an article in praise of Enron and touting the “risk -free economy”—yes, in Scientific American of all places! I stuck it out for another two years or so, but eventually declined to renew my subscription when they became embarrassingly futuristic and psychologically materialistic in the run-up to Y2K. It very much affected me that a magazine I had erstwhile looked upon as the very guardian of truth could be so nakedly, amateurishly, pathetically wrong.

Live and learn, I guess.