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

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From the New York Times:

The Moral Voice of Corporate America
By DAVID GELLES AUG. 19, 2017

The nation has split into political tribes. The culture wars are back, waged over transgender rights and immigration. White nationalists are on the march.

Amid this turbulence, a surprising group of Americans is testing its moral voice more forcefully than ever: C.E.O.s. …

Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said, “The equal treatment of all people is one of our nation’s bedrock principles.” …

The forthright engagement of these and other executives with one of the most charged political issues in years — the swelling confidence of a torch-bearing, swastika-saluting, whites-first movement — is “a seminal moment in the history of business in America,” said Darren Walker, the president of the Ford Foundation and a board member at PepsiCo.

“In this maelstrom, the most clarifying voice has been the voice of business,” he said. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”

In 2017, the rich get not only richer but holier.

 
Hide 143 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/17/16162226/corporations-replacing-churches-americas-conscience

    Are corporations becoming the new arbiters of public morality?

    … what’s remarkable is not the decision of an individual company — Airbnb, say, or Google — to make a principled and visible choice to ally its personal brand with a given set of values, but rather the prevailing winds of cultural change. The remarkable thing here is the overall climate that makes it profitable for them to make it.

    … Once, a company might have sold sex, or wealth; the opportunity that buying this product would make you into the person you want to be. (Just remember Mad Men’s Don Draper’s famous maxim, “What you call love was invented by guys like me to sell nylons.”) Now, they sell a community-based form of virtue.

    … But, in practice, the reinforcement the company provides — demanding the spending of money as a ritualistic as well as transactional act, fostering communal interactions with its fans on social media — is less unilateral. It’s not just virtue-signaling, but virtue-creating.

    Needless to say, they don’t explore the idea that under capitalism a virtue — like being pro-immigration — might be boosted because it’s good for business.

    • Replies: @Luke Lea
    "Corporations replacing churches as America's conscience."

    I can see this as a future case study at the Harvard Business School: "How to open yourself to hostile takeover if you don't prioritize the bottom line." That's one of the great things about capitalism!

    Only government sets the rules of the game and, once set, those are the ones you have to play by. If we want real reform in America it is the rules of the game we must change: on trade, on immigration, on the length of the working day, one the way capital and labor are taxed and/or subsidized.

    , @nebulafox
    Peak Vox. The kiddie shock troops of the Establishment media.
  2. We’ve had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren’t naturally seen as our superiors, but as many aspects of the 20th century that was a weird historical exception and only looked normal to us because we we in it.

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @bomag

    We’ve had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren’t naturally seen as our superiors
     
    Hunter - gatherers just redistribute from anyone seen as rich. Modern society with its large buildings, ships and such required the concentration of wealth; thus the "do not covet" laws. Indulging the rich is a rather new concept in the grand sweep.
    , @Jack D
    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution. And of course Jesus said that it's easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.
    , @Difference maker
    There are other differences. The nobility of old across the Eurasian landmass looked upon merchantry as the lowest occupation
  3. “The Moral Voice of Corporate America”: very droll.

  4. I don’t think I have to add anything on this site about the ridiculous idea that these CEOs are “speaking truth to power”. However, I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe, that corporations are now some kind of powerless people standing up to this mighty threat. If this is what they sincerely believe then things are worse than I have ever imagined are possible.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    No comments on this one, but I think they find it a reassurance that their values are universal and fundamental, another sign they're all settled matters, like slavery is wrong; and an indicator of just how far beyond the pale Trump must be that even they would resign.

    Maybe a bit of triumphalism too that they've got CEO's to speak their language. Power on their side.

    , @eD
    "that corporations are now some kind of powerless people standing up to this mighty threat."

    But this is exactly what the corporatist, sometimes called the libertarian, right believed or has claimed to believe throughout my life time.
  5. to speak truth to power

    They have no self-awareness.

    • Replies: @415 reasons
    And no shame
    , @AndrewR
    I disagree with this. I think it can entirely be explained by a lack of shame.

    Imagine being you, just as self-aware as the real you, but motivated by an unquenchable lust for money and power. You would say stuff like this knowing full well that it's absurd, but since the peasants eat it up, you happily say it. Is that hard to imagine?

    You don't get to the peaks of power without a whole lot of ruthlessness, and ruthlessness often shows itself through sappy virtue signalling.
    , @e
    My experience with lefties is that they are trained puppies. Period.
    , @Olorin
    Or self.
  6. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”

    LOL!

    We are now beyond Orwell. Winston is being tortured for the crime of having too much power.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    Outer/Inner party members proclaiming loudly that the spirit of O'Brien shall not broken! (Also, give that guy a pay rise!)
    , @Moshe
    That's pretty damn good. The comment I mean, not poor Wilson. As an aside, if Steve hasn't seen the movie I recommend it. I was just thinking about that scene at the end where the dehumanized former true lovers met each other after the party was done with them.
    , @Cagey Beast
    And maybe while O'Brien tortures Winston Smith for his unearned White privilege, he'll accuse him of "gentrifying pain"?

    https://twitter.com/martian_munk/status/898623273080160256
  7. @reiner Tor

    to speak truth to power
     
    They have no self-awareness.

    And no shame

    • Agree: reiner Tor
  8. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”

    That means they are talking to themselves.

    But I don’t think that they will be talking about one great moral issue:

    “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You're hoping for too much. But at least we all, CEO and schoolteacher and barista alike, can agree that Nazis-are-bad-and-Diversity-is-a-strength.
    , @AndrewR
    Lol. What are you stuck in 2011? In the Current Year, such concerns are quaint. The Real Menace is white people who don't want to become a hated and exploited minority in their own country. Focusing on reducing income inequality makes you objectively pro-Nazi.
    , @WR
    Needless to say, what we're seeing is "speaking power to truth." As usual the NYT turns things upside down.

    The guy speaking "truth". Someone worth 5 billion who controls the thoughts of more than half of the US population and can easily crush his ideological opponents.

    The guy holding "power." A blue-collar worker who makes $30,000/year and wants to preserve his cultural heritage while hordes of state-protected antifas attempt to club him to death.

    Note to $PLC intern. I came to the United States as an adult, having previously lived in four other countries. I have no connection whatsoever with Southerners who oppose the destruction of Confederate statues. Yet, I strongly believe that they - just like any other ethnic group - have a right to preserve cultural artifacts that symbolize their ancestral past.
  9. @kihowi
    We've had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren't naturally seen as our superiors, but as many aspects of the 20th century that was a weird historical exception and only looked normal to us because we we in it.

    We’ve had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren’t naturally seen as our superiors

    Hunter – gatherers just redistribute from anyone seen as rich. Modern society with its large buildings, ships and such required the concentration of wealth; thus the “do not covet” laws. Indulging the rich is a rather new concept in the grand sweep.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    IIRC, thete was a sedentary tribe in the Pac NW that mostly lived off salmon but didn't have much agriculture. Every year the wealthier people would donate to poorer people, and the more you donated the more social prestige you got.
  10. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @neutral
    I don't think I have to add anything on this site about the ridiculous idea that these CEOs are "speaking truth to power". However, I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe, that corporations are now some kind of powerless people standing up to this mighty threat. If this is what they sincerely believe then things are worse than I have ever imagined are possible.

    No comments on this one, but I think they find it a reassurance that their values are universal and fundamental, another sign they’re all settled matters, like slavery is wrong; and an indicator of just how far beyond the pale Trump must be that even they would resign.

    Maybe a bit of triumphalism too that they’ve got CEO’s to speak their language. Power on their side.

  11. Top CEOs are pulling back their engagement with Federal officials, while maintaining their engagement with the anti-capitalist vanguard limited to the payment of quasi-extortion contributions to the progressive machinery – non-profit social activist foundations and similar vehicles – and to the statement of public declarations of support for progressive values in the corporate code of conduct.

    The pull back is likely a result of increased uncertainty about the standards under which their code of conduct will be judged in the future under emerging political actors.

    Independently from public statements and political contributions, enhancing equity shareholder value is the fundamental guiding principle of contemporary CEOs. The perception that corporate management is operating under increased political uncertainty is most likely occurring at the same time as the perception of risk and uncertainty in other business and economic conditions is rising, in a highly correlated shift towards risk aversion across all asset classes in the financial markets.

    In the years following the 2008 financial crisis the economy and the stock market have made progress towards recovering from the deep bottom in which the economy and the financial markets had fallen. As the scope for further progress is increasingly constrained by fundamental scarcities – of labor productivity and of rewarding capital investment opportunities – uncertainty is more elevated. All this adds up to a historically notable period of social change, an emerging counter-culture, economic stagnation and financial irrational exuberance. A traumatic generational transition that exposes gaps in the nation.

    Reversion to historical average levels of uncertainty and sociopolitical volatility will allow the worst of the emerging changes to be discarded in the future, provided that our institutions maintain continuity with our historical roots. If our connection with history is rewritten, recalibrating our historical standards, reversion to lower uncertainty becomes less certain.

    The future could play out in a very wide range of potential scenarios, and the CEOs are reacting by pulling back on their perceived risk exposure. Increased risk aversion is not auspicious for the prospects of financial market’s progress and stability.

    • Replies: @eD
    "Independently from public statements and political contributions, enhancing equity shareholder value is the fundamental guiding principle of contemporary CEOs."

    Slightly off topic, this, and the entire lengthy post around it, is simply bulshit. As is the case of bullshit, thought you here this often its hard to argue against it because its unclear what the statement means.

    But the best way to tackle bullshit is probably to add needed items of context. Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. "Enhancing shareholder calue" was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don't have shareholders.

    Also the trend has been for the CEOs themselves to be major shareholders in their own companies in the form of stock options awarded for their compensation.
  12. Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee.

    Starbucks Founder Questions Country’s ‘Moral Fiber’

    SEATTLE – Starbucks founder and chairman Howard Schultz says the events surrounding a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend have put the “moral fiber” of the country in question.

    “The moral fiber, the values, and what we as a country have stood for is literally hanging in the abyss,” Schultz told employees. “We are at a critical juncture in American history. That is not an exaggeration. We are at and facing a crucible in which our daily life is being challenged and being questioned about what is right and what is wrong.”

    “What we witnessed this past weekend … is against every sense of what is right,” he said. “My fear is not only that this behavior is being given permission and license, but its conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.”

    Telling employees he was speaking to them “as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent,” Schultz said it’s hard to remain optimistic about the country’s future “in the midst of such a storm,” but he still is.

    “…conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.” I guess he just missed all those antifas.

    He needs a dose of Pappy O’Daniel:

    http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=M4RS&type=Movies&movie=O_Brother_Where_Art_Thou&quote=moralfiber.txt&file=moralfiber.m4r

    • Replies: @Ed
    Do liberals and CEOs really want to engage on the topic of morality? I don't think it's a topic they'll fare too well.
    , @AndrewR
    "Fellow Americans" is the new "fellow white people"

    Is there a list of powerful people of Hebrewness with dual citizenship?
    , @Luke Lea
    "Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee."

    Let's hold them to their vow to hire 10,000 Muslim refugee baristas. Picketing the headquarters in Seattle would be a good way to do it.
    , @Russ
    "Telling employees he was speaking to them “as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent,” "

    Prompting one to attempt fathoming any other CEO addressing the troops as a this, a that, a Catholic, and an other. Boggles the mind.
  13. @CCZ

    "These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
     
    That means they are talking to themselves.

    But I don't think that they will be talking about one great moral issue:

    "The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time."
     

    You’re hoping for too much. But at least we all, CEO and schoolteacher and barista alike, can agree that Nazis-are-bad-and-Diversity-is-a-strength.

  14. the swelling confidence of a torch-bearing, swastika-saluting, whites-first movement

    These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power

    In the NYT morality play, the “power” these CEOs are risking all to speak truth to is the pathetic tiny collection of swastika-waving plants, dupes and bystanders at Charlottesville.

    These are very small shadow puppets projected onto a giant screen by the MSM in order to gather even greater power into the hands of lunatic Cultural Revolutionaries.

    In fact, the CEOs are like modern-day Schlotbaronen groveling before SJW commissars (to mix historical comparisons) to parrot the totalitarian party line in order to avoid being molested themselves by the SJW fanatics.

    • Replies: @TheJester
    CEOs taking a moral position on anything? Recall that Steve Jobs said that he is in business. If you want to save whales, don't expect Apple to help you do it.

    The CEOs and Silicon Valley are siding with the Progressives (a.k.a. Communists in other contexts) because they know the Progressives have the support and finances from the international Jewish community.

    The Progressives and their allies are the same people who have been able to topple governments in "color revolutions". These are the same people who constitute the major portion of the American Deep State. These are the same people to control the MSM in both North America and the European Union. These are the same people who control American foreign policy and are desperately trying to isolate Trump and remove him from the Presidency.

    In short, the CEOs are buying "futures" on who will constitute the government of the United States as we continue the transition to an authoritarian government that is progressively (NPI) coming to resemble the Soviet state. The CEOs are in the process of cutting their deal with the Progressives that will allow them to continue to accumulate obscene wealth in return for giving the Progressives a free hand in the reorganization of American society and the American state.
  15. Anonymous [AKA "X-Ray"] says:

    “I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe”

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. That explains the hypocrisy between now and yesteryear concerning corporate influence (and everything else):

    Past: corporations stigmatized as being conservative –> corporations bad.

    Present: corporations police speech the establishment legally can’t –> corporations good.

    There is no contradiction here. They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    Religion.

    Past: Christian Right supported conservatives –> organized religion is bad.

    Present: Muslims and their descendants will vote against conservatives –> Islam good.

    Climate Change.

    Past: white voters don’t care about fringe environmental issues –> environmentalism good.

    Present: limiting immigration would mitigate Climate Change but help conservatives –> environmentalism is good but we shouldn’t do anything about environmental issues, except close down coal jobs in conservative-voting areas, sign unenforceable climate deals that will probably fail, and increase immigration to the United States.

    War.

    Past: people being killed might vote liberal if they were here in the us, people doing the killing are majority white –> war is bad.

    Present: people who might be killed would vote conservative if located in the US (white Russians) –> war against Russia is good.

    Free Speech.

    Past: vast majority of Americans are non-fringe whites and could censor speech if they didn’t particularly like it –> free speech is good (to prevent liberals from losing their rights).

    Present: liberals have the power to censor speech without recourse, free speech is undermining the liberal narrative –> free speech is bad.

    Violence.

    Past: violence is bad because it could be used against liberals by the majority ~conservative population –> violence is bad.

    Present: violence can be used against opponents of liberals without recourse –> violence is “justified” (see Marco Rubio’s tweet).

    Government Spying.

    Past: conservative Bush doing the spying –> spying bad.

    Present: Obama/anti-Trump Deep State doing the spying –> spying good or at least a non-issue.

    Poverty

    Past: some poor whites voted democrat –> socialism good.

    Present: most poor whites don’t vote democrat –> corporatism isn’t really that bad (Hillary: “sure, I’ll break up the big banks, wink wink”).

    Multiculturalism.

    Past: country mostly white, blacks lived in conservative areas –> integration, busing, diversity…all good everywhere.

    Present: country increasingly non-white everywhere, too many blacks live in liberal areas –> integration bad because that’s cultural appropriation – also deport blacks to the heartland.

    As you can see, Liberals aren’t really hard to understand, despite all the articles from high-minded conservative types trying to explain their mystifying hypocrisy. Liberals don’t have any core principles other than a primal need advance themselves by proving that they are better than some foil (whites, lower-class “uneducated” types, Southerners). They’ll support whatever cause they think allows them to do so while opposing (or changing their minds) about whatever issue they believe either does not serve that purpose or empowers their foil in some way.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That's it. Just for completeness' sake:

    Immigration

    Past: Businesses import immigrants to break strikes

    Present: Businesses import immigrants who vote for us

    (This one's more EU/UK:)

    Police state

    Past: Infringes upon our liberties

    Present: Needs more powers to stop Muslims from doing things that would cause popular rejection of them

    , @Lurker

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. . . . . . . They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.
     
    I've been sparring with libtards over the past couple of days where they shriek with delight over the thought of some WN being locked in prison with violent black homosexual rapists. On another day, on another thread they would be shrieking with horror were anyone to suggest such a phenomenon even existed.

    I used to be a liberal, the endless hypocrisy and illogicality broke me in the end.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Excellent commentary, X-Ray.
    , @27 year old
    >Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy.


    And? Good for them.

    The only objection to this strategy is that it's highly effective at destroying enemies.

    Our side needs to adopt the exact same approach.

    Who whom is the only game in town.

    If you're playing some other game about muh principles and muh truth, you're going to lose.
    , @biz
    Excellent list. I think many of those 'turn on a dime' behaviors is why many people have ceased identifying with liberals. The most egregious and brazen one is clearly their complete turn-around on religion.

    To be fair, there are conservative equivalents:

    Corporations.

    Past: Corporations should have the same protections as people. Government should serve corporate interests because a rising tide lifts all boats. All employment is at will and 'right to work.' What's good for GM is good for America.

    Present: Break up the biggest corporations like Google and Apple because they have too much power!

    States' Rights or localism.

    Past: The federal government is too big and we need to restore power to the states. Federal agents are 'jack-booted' thugs.

    Present: States are making their own laws regarding which drugs to legalize and who they will spend money deporting?? Send the feds in!

    Private employers discriminating against people for their political beliefs.

    Past: Hollywood studio blacklist commies -> good

    Present: SJW / Silicon Valley blacklist libertarians -> bad

    Public figures being de-platformed.

    Past: Van Jones, Dan Rather, etc say mean things about W Bush and made to go away -> good

    Present: Charles Murray and Milo Y prevented from speaking -> bad

    White working class culture.

    Past: White working class votes for New Deal Democrats -> they're a bunch of trashy hillbillies

    Present: White working class votes for Republicans -> the soul of America
  16. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”

    Yeah, ‘cos nothing says power like having one boot crushing in your face while a dozen others are kicking you in the groin and crotch.

  17. Ok CEOs – and here the Stanford professor with the highest students ranking concerning his teaching qualities (at least, that’s what he said about himself a few months back), Hans-Ulrich Gumbrecht. He writes today in the German sunday paper Die Welt about Charlotteville and it’s consequences:

    President Trump failed to at last erect borders for the new right by explicitly critizising them. He therewith damaged his image and his authority as president – happily so, you’d want to say – more severely than ever before.

  18. @CCZ
    Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee.

    Starbucks Founder Questions Country's 'Moral Fiber'

    SEATTLE - Starbucks founder and chairman Howard Schultz says the events surrounding a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend have put the "moral fiber" of the country in question.

    "The moral fiber, the values, and what we as a country have stood for is literally hanging in the abyss," Schultz told employees. "We are at a critical juncture in American history. That is not an exaggeration. We are at and facing a crucible in which our daily life is being challenged and being questioned about what is right and what is wrong."

    "What we witnessed this past weekend ... is against every sense of what is right," he said. "My fear is not only that this behavior is being given permission and license, but its conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face."

    Telling employees he was speaking to them "as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent," Schultz said it's hard to remain optimistic about the country's future "in the midst of such a storm," but he still is.
     
    “...conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.” I guess he just missed all those antifas.

    He needs a dose of Pappy O'Daniel:

    http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=M4RS&type=Movies&movie=O_Brother_Where_Art_Thou&quote=moralfiber.txt&file=moralfiber.m4r

    Do liberals and CEOs really want to engage on the topic of morality? I don’t think it’s a topic they’ll fare too well.

  19. You don’t need to live in the USA to see that a putsch is taking place and the most powerful man in the world is being pushed out of office because:

    1). He is a Kremlin agent.
    2). He is a Nazi

    The NYT takes these two allegations, unproven and frankly silly, as a given, while Seth Richard’s convenient death goes uninvestigated.

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts. The rest of the world needs to unite against you and fence you off. Then you can scream and shout about transgender bathroom right until your heads explode.

    You spread death and destruction and wear a smug of smug self-satisfied arrogance on your faces as you do it. Any regime you don’t like, no matter how popular, can be changed and who cares about ‘collateral damage’. You take Saudi and Israeli money simultaneously and see no contradiction in this.

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    USA go away!

    • Agree: German_reader
    • Replies: @Perspective
    Indeed, Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) seems to have infected people outside the US as well. The amount of hate and vitriol directed at him by low information people is astounding, I recall seeing a woman crying after the election because according to her "Hillary deserved to win". I've tried meeting some of these people half way, but it's pointless because as soon as you don't jump on the I hate Trump band wagon they start foaming at the mouth.
    , @Cagey Beast
    You are exactly right but, unfortunately, I live in a country that's given up on being its own country. We just wait for things to be decided in the USA and then act as though things have always been that way and could never be otherwise, except perhaps more so. Justin Trudeau and the openly gay, half Indian Prime Minister of Ireland will be dancing their little hearts out at Montreal's gay pride parade today. Whatever the American madhouse comes up with, we institutionalize. We institutionalize the decisions of people who should be institutionalized.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts.
     
    Just as the Soviet Union did ≠ the Russians, the warmongering, PC-Police-State US Feral Government ≠ the Americans. Is that too hard to understand for you?

    OTOH, the way people write even on this board, some seem to want MORE Feral Gov't, and think that it'll all be fine, so long as it's THEIR more Feral Gov't (like a battered husband, say a Bill Clinton, they've got bite marks on their arms, pieces of Whitehouse china lodged in their skulls, bacterial infections from deep scratches in the scrotal area, yet still they come back for more ... even support their wives for Senatorial and Presidential positions.) There are shelters for you kinds of people, you know that, right!!?


    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.
     
    I can't really argue with that. Where do you live, 22pp22? If it were anywhere of which you could say better about, I'd have probably moved there already. How many guns do people own, in general? (Just asking.)
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Repeat comment, take II:

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts.
     
    Just as the Soviet Union did ≠ the Russians, the warmongering, PC-Police-State US Feral Government ≠ the Americans. Is that too hard to understand for you?

    OTOH, the way people write even on this board, some seem to want MORE Feral Gov’t, and think that it’ll all be fine, so long as it’s THEIR more Feral Gov’t (like a battered husband, say a Bill Clinton, they’ve got bite marks on their arms, pieces of Whitehouse china lodged in their skulls, bacterial infections from deep scratches in the scrotal area, yet still they come back for more … even support their wives for Senatorial and Presidential positions.) There are shelters for you kinds of people, you know that, right!!?

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.
     
    I can’t really argue with that. Where do you live, 22pp22? If it were anywhere about which you could say better stuff, I’d have probably moved there already.
  20. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    "I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe"

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. That explains the hypocrisy between now and yesteryear concerning corporate influence (and everything else):

    Past: corporations stigmatized as being conservative --> corporations bad.

    Present: corporations police speech the establishment legally can't --> corporations good.

    There is no contradiction here. They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    Religion.

    Past: Christian Right supported conservatives --> organized religion is bad.

    Present: Muslims and their descendants will vote against conservatives --> Islam good.

    Climate Change.

    Past: white voters don't care about fringe environmental issues --> environmentalism good.

    Present: limiting immigration would mitigate Climate Change but help conservatives --> environmentalism is good but we shouldn't do anything about environmental issues, except close down coal jobs in conservative-voting areas, sign unenforceable climate deals that will probably fail, and increase immigration to the United States.

    War.

    Past: people being killed might vote liberal if they were here in the us, people doing the killing are majority white --> war is bad.

    Present: people who might be killed would vote conservative if located in the US (white Russians) --> war against Russia is good.

    Free Speech.

    Past: vast majority of Americans are non-fringe whites and could censor speech if they didn't particularly like it --> free speech is good (to prevent liberals from losing their rights).

    Present: liberals have the power to censor speech without recourse, free speech is undermining the liberal narrative --> free speech is bad.

    Violence.

    Past: violence is bad because it could be used against liberals by the majority ~conservative population --> violence is bad.

    Present: violence can be used against opponents of liberals without recourse --> violence is "justified" (see Marco Rubio's tweet).

    Government Spying.

    Past: conservative Bush doing the spying --> spying bad.

    Present: Obama/anti-Trump Deep State doing the spying --> spying good or at least a non-issue.

    Poverty

    Past: some poor whites voted democrat --> socialism good.

    Present: most poor whites don't vote democrat --> corporatism isn't really that bad (Hillary: "sure, I'll break up the big banks, wink wink").

    Multiculturalism.

    Past: country mostly white, blacks lived in conservative areas --> integration, busing, diversity...all good everywhere.

    Present: country increasingly non-white everywhere, too many blacks live in liberal areas --> integration bad because that's cultural appropriation - also deport blacks to the heartland.

    As you can see, Liberals aren't really hard to understand, despite all the articles from high-minded conservative types trying to explain their mystifying hypocrisy. Liberals don't have any core principles other than a primal need advance themselves by proving that they are better than some foil (whites, lower-class "uneducated" types, Southerners). They'll support whatever cause they think allows them to do so while opposing (or changing their minds) about whatever issue they believe either does not serve that purpose or empowers their foil in some way.

    That’s it. Just for completeness’ sake:

    Immigration

    Past: Businesses import immigrants to break strikes

    Present: Businesses import immigrants who vote for us

    (This one’s more EU/UK:)

    Police state

    Past: Infringes upon our liberties

    Present: Needs more powers to stop Muslims from doing things that would cause popular rejection of them

  21. @bomag

    “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
     
    LOL!

    We are now beyond Orwell. Winston is being tortured for the crime of having too much power.

    Outer/Inner party members proclaiming loudly that the spirit of O’Brien shall not broken! (Also, give that guy a pay rise!)

  22. @Anonymous
    "I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe"

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. That explains the hypocrisy between now and yesteryear concerning corporate influence (and everything else):

    Past: corporations stigmatized as being conservative --> corporations bad.

    Present: corporations police speech the establishment legally can't --> corporations good.

    There is no contradiction here. They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    Religion.

    Past: Christian Right supported conservatives --> organized religion is bad.

    Present: Muslims and their descendants will vote against conservatives --> Islam good.

    Climate Change.

    Past: white voters don't care about fringe environmental issues --> environmentalism good.

    Present: limiting immigration would mitigate Climate Change but help conservatives --> environmentalism is good but we shouldn't do anything about environmental issues, except close down coal jobs in conservative-voting areas, sign unenforceable climate deals that will probably fail, and increase immigration to the United States.

    War.

    Past: people being killed might vote liberal if they were here in the us, people doing the killing are majority white --> war is bad.

    Present: people who might be killed would vote conservative if located in the US (white Russians) --> war against Russia is good.

    Free Speech.

    Past: vast majority of Americans are non-fringe whites and could censor speech if they didn't particularly like it --> free speech is good (to prevent liberals from losing their rights).

    Present: liberals have the power to censor speech without recourse, free speech is undermining the liberal narrative --> free speech is bad.

    Violence.

    Past: violence is bad because it could be used against liberals by the majority ~conservative population --> violence is bad.

    Present: violence can be used against opponents of liberals without recourse --> violence is "justified" (see Marco Rubio's tweet).

    Government Spying.

    Past: conservative Bush doing the spying --> spying bad.

    Present: Obama/anti-Trump Deep State doing the spying --> spying good or at least a non-issue.

    Poverty

    Past: some poor whites voted democrat --> socialism good.

    Present: most poor whites don't vote democrat --> corporatism isn't really that bad (Hillary: "sure, I'll break up the big banks, wink wink").

    Multiculturalism.

    Past: country mostly white, blacks lived in conservative areas --> integration, busing, diversity...all good everywhere.

    Present: country increasingly non-white everywhere, too many blacks live in liberal areas --> integration bad because that's cultural appropriation - also deport blacks to the heartland.

    As you can see, Liberals aren't really hard to understand, despite all the articles from high-minded conservative types trying to explain their mystifying hypocrisy. Liberals don't have any core principles other than a primal need advance themselves by proving that they are better than some foil (whites, lower-class "uneducated" types, Southerners). They'll support whatever cause they think allows them to do so while opposing (or changing their minds) about whatever issue they believe either does not serve that purpose or empowers their foil in some way.

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. . . . . . . They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    I’ve been sparring with libtards over the past couple of days where they shriek with delight over the thought of some WN being locked in prison with violent black homosexual rapists. On another day, on another thread they would be shrieking with horror were anyone to suggest such a phenomenon even existed.

    I used to be a liberal, the endless hypocrisy and illogicality broke me in the end.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Liberals decry the (imaginary) "rape culture" in society at large, while celebrating the (very real) rape culture in prisons.
  23. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said, “The equal treatment of all people is one of our nation’s bedrock principles.”

    Counterpoint: Interesting NYT Sunday Review piece that admits that the United States wasn’t founded to be a Zeroth Amendment dumping ground, among other things.

    What White Nationalism Gets Right About American History

    Condensed snips from the article:

    President Trump stepped in to salvage the message that the rally organizers had originally hoped to project.

    Until Trump’s comments, few critics seemed to identify the larger relationship the alt-right sees between its beliefs and the ideals of the American founders.

    The most fundamental legislative goal of the white nationalist movement is to limit nonwhite immigration. It is important to remember that such limits were in place during the lifetimes of many current white nationalists; it was the default status until the 1960s. In the 1790s, the first naturalization laws of the United States Congress limited citizenship to a “free white person.”

    [Trump’s] comments supporting the rally gave new purpose to the white nationalist movement, unlike any endorsement it has ever received. Among its followers, being at that rally will become something to brag about, and some people who didn’t want to be associated with extremism will now see the cause as more mainstream. When the president doesn’t provide condemnation that he has been pressed to give, what message does that send but encouragement?

    The United States was founded as a white nationalist country, and that legacy remains today.

    Sometimes it seems that the white nationalists are most honest about the very real foundation of white supremacy upon which our nation was built.

    • Replies: @Ed
    The subject of the diversity visa lottery came up recently at the 4th circuit. One judge was stunned after hearing about the program. He never heard of it, doesn't recall voting for it and was incredulous that such a program exists.

    https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/897509245532483584
  24. @bomag

    “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
     
    LOL!

    We are now beyond Orwell. Winston is being tortured for the crime of having too much power.

    That’s pretty damn good. The comment I mean, not poor Wilson. As an aside, if Steve hasn’t seen the movie I recommend it. I was just thinking about that scene at the end where the dehumanized former true lovers met each other after the party was done with them.

  25. Amid this turbulence, a surprising group of Americans is testing its moral voice more forcefully than ever: C.E.O.s. …

    Unless he’s referring here to the CEOs of Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A, that is one of the stupidest statements by a journalist I’ve read in a week of real doozies.

  26. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said, “The equal treatment of all people is one of our nation’s bedrock principles.” …

    So, does that mean that Jamie Dimon wants to do away with affirmative action and minority set asides, etc. and affirm the First Amendment to the Constitution? Somehow, I don’t think so.

    • Agree: Travis
  27. I think this is part of the reason that Steve Bannon is hated so much: Bannon is more sympathetic to the white working-class than he is to “progressive” corporations.

    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
  28. @bomag

    “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
     
    LOL!

    We are now beyond Orwell. Winston is being tortured for the crime of having too much power.

    And maybe while O’Brien tortures Winston Smith for his unearned White privilege, he’ll accuse him of “gentrifying pain”?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    This is very encouraging because it shows you that the Coalition of the Fringes is inherently unstable. If, God forbid, they would ever take full power, they would immediately fall upon each other like wolves as they each grabbed for their share of the spoils - "I have more Diversity Pokemon Points than you do, my saints are holier than your saints and I deserve more goodies than you." Of course, by this point, it might be a Pyrrhic victory - the country would be destroyed in the process - see Venezuela.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    One thing Airstrip One didn't suffer from was Diversity. Orwell never imagined England importing millions of non-whites, nor did Kubrick in Clockwork Orange.
    , @DFH
    OT, but do the blacks et al. complaining about gentrification know that white people built and lived in inner cities first?
  29. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said ….

    This guy is being touted as someone to listen to about morality?!! Holy moley. I don’t know too many of the details, but as far as Big Finance reaming the American people, I’ve read enough on Zerohedge to know that Jamie Dimon is not someone you’d want to hold up as anyone resembling a decent human being. Go ahead, mention Jamie Dimon in the comment section of any ZH article – I double-dog dare ya’!

    You know, I don’t need to tell the NY Times writers where to go – they are on the right road already.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    A former member of his secretarial pool where I once worked said they loved him because he would take them out for adult beverages and pay for it.
  30. So on the one hand there is still a very strong anti-corporation strain on the left, but apparently more and more progressives are lining up with the largest and most powerful companies in the land because they have the ability to enforce the speech codes and hiring/firing based on having the right ideology that they would like the government to have.

    • Replies: @Shouting Thomas
    Only Prez Trump has the courage to take on the "corporatism" the left has been bitching about for a couple of decades.
    , @Olorin
    What Shouting Thomas said, and yes, you're right.

    I think what's happening is that they see that America stands a chance of returning to deals, business, building good things well, etc.

    The left crap we've been hearing from the private sector has been coming from mostly the chattering classes in the FIRE economy, media, and big tech.

    MAGA implies building things that these chuckleheads cannot...and moreover every contract to build something big is going to redistribute power dramatically. (This is why, btw, they have stonewalled on infrastructure these past decades. The chattering classes see no way it will profit them. What profits them is blaat.)

    So they are recasting their kind of corporate power--media, tech, finance, social work, academe support services--as SJW precisely because it's all they got, and they plan to oppose the actual building of actual things. Since they can't build them, they can hold hostage those who can/do.

    This really is a war between competent Americans and speculation-based parasites.

  31. @Anonymous
    "I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe"

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. That explains the hypocrisy between now and yesteryear concerning corporate influence (and everything else):

    Past: corporations stigmatized as being conservative --> corporations bad.

    Present: corporations police speech the establishment legally can't --> corporations good.

    There is no contradiction here. They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    Religion.

    Past: Christian Right supported conservatives --> organized religion is bad.

    Present: Muslims and their descendants will vote against conservatives --> Islam good.

    Climate Change.

    Past: white voters don't care about fringe environmental issues --> environmentalism good.

    Present: limiting immigration would mitigate Climate Change but help conservatives --> environmentalism is good but we shouldn't do anything about environmental issues, except close down coal jobs in conservative-voting areas, sign unenforceable climate deals that will probably fail, and increase immigration to the United States.

    War.

    Past: people being killed might vote liberal if they were here in the us, people doing the killing are majority white --> war is bad.

    Present: people who might be killed would vote conservative if located in the US (white Russians) --> war against Russia is good.

    Free Speech.

    Past: vast majority of Americans are non-fringe whites and could censor speech if they didn't particularly like it --> free speech is good (to prevent liberals from losing their rights).

    Present: liberals have the power to censor speech without recourse, free speech is undermining the liberal narrative --> free speech is bad.

    Violence.

    Past: violence is bad because it could be used against liberals by the majority ~conservative population --> violence is bad.

    Present: violence can be used against opponents of liberals without recourse --> violence is "justified" (see Marco Rubio's tweet).

    Government Spying.

    Past: conservative Bush doing the spying --> spying bad.

    Present: Obama/anti-Trump Deep State doing the spying --> spying good or at least a non-issue.

    Poverty

    Past: some poor whites voted democrat --> socialism good.

    Present: most poor whites don't vote democrat --> corporatism isn't really that bad (Hillary: "sure, I'll break up the big banks, wink wink").

    Multiculturalism.

    Past: country mostly white, blacks lived in conservative areas --> integration, busing, diversity...all good everywhere.

    Present: country increasingly non-white everywhere, too many blacks live in liberal areas --> integration bad because that's cultural appropriation - also deport blacks to the heartland.

    As you can see, Liberals aren't really hard to understand, despite all the articles from high-minded conservative types trying to explain their mystifying hypocrisy. Liberals don't have any core principles other than a primal need advance themselves by proving that they are better than some foil (whites, lower-class "uneducated" types, Southerners). They'll support whatever cause they think allows them to do so while opposing (or changing their minds) about whatever issue they believe either does not serve that purpose or empowers their foil in some way.

    Excellent commentary, X-Ray.

  32. @22pp22
    You don't need to live in the USA to see that a putsch is taking place and the most powerful man in the world is being pushed out of office because:

    1). He is a Kremlin agent.
    2). He is a Nazi

    The NYT takes these two allegations, unproven and frankly silly, as a given, while Seth Richard's convenient death goes uninvestigated.

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts. The rest of the world needs to unite against you and fence you off. Then you can scream and shout about transgender bathroom right until your heads explode.

    You spread death and destruction and wear a smug of smug self-satisfied arrogance on your faces as you do it. Any regime you don't like, no matter how popular, can be changed and who cares about 'collateral damage'. You take Saudi and Israeli money simultaneously and see no contradiction in this.

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    USA go away!

    Indeed, Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) seems to have infected people outside the US as well. The amount of hate and vitriol directed at him by low information people is astounding, I recall seeing a woman crying after the election because according to her “Hillary deserved to win”. I’ve tried meeting some of these people half way, but it’s pointless because as soon as you don’t jump on the I hate Trump band wagon they start foaming at the mouth.

    • Replies: @Alden
    My sister was in Europe for 5 weeks this summer, mostly in France. She said the French newspapers were as obsessed with hatred of Trump as American papers. The headlines were Trump, Trump, Trump.

    I can't wait till the next election cycle with Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris all battling to attract the most anti White voters.

    I believe that Trump will be re elected by us White deplorables just to show the media and the elites that we are not their brainwashed empty vessels.
  33. Here is an inspiring stock photo promoting gay hookup culture that appears on the Chase login page :

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    No wonder the men tellers seem to always want my phone number along with the usual account # and HIV records when I go cash a check! Long electronic banking.

    BTW, Chase branches seem to be co-located with pet shops a lot. What's up with that?

    , @Cagey Beast
    Funny how both of them look quite swishy by earlier standards but look ridiculously rugged and straight by Millennial standards. That's what the Millennial equivalents of Jean Gabin or Robert Shaw look like.
    , @anonymous-antimarxist
    E Michael Jones of Culture Wars Magazine has many good Youtube videos on how corporate America embraces gay culture because it total supports consumerism and usury as opposed to the stale pale male patriarchal family. Why struggle and save when you are not going to leave a posterity and could be very well be dead of some gay related illness by middle age.

    Bye Bye white man.

    It is really sad and depressing.

    As a indication of how far off the rails things have gone in the last fifty years how about this classic commercial that was redone as a huge #1 hit for The Carpenters.

    Crocker Bank "Wedding"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVGmdwHTP1I

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We%27ve_Only_Just_Begun
  34. @Arclight
    So on the one hand there is still a very strong anti-corporation strain on the left, but apparently more and more progressives are lining up with the largest and most powerful companies in the land because they have the ability to enforce the speech codes and hiring/firing based on having the right ideology that they would like the government to have.

    Only Prez Trump has the courage to take on the “corporatism” the left has been bitching about for a couple of decades.

  35. Communism has failed as an economic theory so the war against business is no longer relevant

  36. @22pp22
    You don't need to live in the USA to see that a putsch is taking place and the most powerful man in the world is being pushed out of office because:

    1). He is a Kremlin agent.
    2). He is a Nazi

    The NYT takes these two allegations, unproven and frankly silly, as a given, while Seth Richard's convenient death goes uninvestigated.

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts. The rest of the world needs to unite against you and fence you off. Then you can scream and shout about transgender bathroom right until your heads explode.

    You spread death and destruction and wear a smug of smug self-satisfied arrogance on your faces as you do it. Any regime you don't like, no matter how popular, can be changed and who cares about 'collateral damage'. You take Saudi and Israeli money simultaneously and see no contradiction in this.

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    USA go away!

    You are exactly right but, unfortunately, I live in a country that’s given up on being its own country. We just wait for things to be decided in the USA and then act as though things have always been that way and could never be otherwise, except perhaps more so. Justin Trudeau and the openly gay, half Indian Prime Minister of Ireland will be dancing their little hearts out at Montreal’s gay pride parade today. Whatever the American madhouse comes up with, we institutionalize. We institutionalize the decisions of people who should be institutionalized.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    I live in a country that’s given up on being its own country.
     
    Not really.

    We've got too many people with the power to do something about it who are too busy running an empire to notice, and too many other people who think they'd be better off in the Cosmopol* than as American citizens. That's not the whole country though, or even a majority.


    * - aka ruled by the Davoisie, postnational
  37. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said, “The equal treatment of all people is one of our nation’s bedrock principles.”

    Then the progressive tax code and affirmative action must violate our bedrock principles…

  38. When you think about it, corporations are simply states nominally within larger states and bureaucracies still under some legal restrictions imposed by a larger bureaucracy, called the government. Corporations are centres of power in the same way principalities and grand duchies were centres of power under the Holy Roman Emperor. There’s no reason why self-styled progressives wouldn’t happily support a powerful prince, sorry, CEO who advances their agenda.

  39. @kihowi
    We've had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren't naturally seen as our superiors, but as many aspects of the 20th century that was a weird historical exception and only looked normal to us because we we in it.

    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution. And of course Jesus said that it’s easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.

    • Replies: @AM

    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution.
     
    Eh, they were only so, so on the concept. Renters couldn't vote in almost every colony at the time and nothing changed at founding.

    The best reading of the US Founding is understanding that white Protestant English country aristocrats and middle class were used to governing themselves and wish to continue. Enlightenment ideals were used to justify the break, because theoretically, they owed some allegiance to the Crown by most of their own value system.


    And of course Jesus said that it’s easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.
     
    Please, for the love of God you don't believe in, drop the drive by Christian interpretation. It's bad enough in actual Christians but we've got skin in the game. Committed atheists rarely get it right.
  40. I have to ask again for the 8,000th time: why do we support cutting these guys’ taxes?

    In all of recorded history business has never been so profitable. Their profits as a share of GNP are at 60+ year highs. The only reason we don’t call these guys robber barons is because they’re disproportionately Jewish and are really good at spouting social justice pieties. They make the original robber barons look like paupers. They pretend to earn their profits in places like Puerto Rico and Ireland in order to avoid paying taxes to the United States.

    Their biggest success has been to destroy any semblance of a party that purports to represent white interests. If I vote Democrat I have to vote for a party that wants to flood the country with tens of millions of minorities and give them more legal rights than me. If I vote for Republicans I have to vote for assholes like Orrin Hatch who only wants to cut taxes for rich people and is only slightly more conservative on social issues than the Democrats.

    • Agree: schmenz, Lot
    • Replies: @European-American
    > why do we support cutting these guys’ taxes?

    Because if we don't, it's easier than ever for them to take even more of their money elsewhere?

    Imagine there's no countries,
    And no taxation too....
    , @Flip
    "If I vote Democrat I have to vote for a party that wants to flood the country with tens of millions of minorities and give them more legal rights than me."

    Most Republicans in Congress want to do that too.

    I voted for Trump, but would probably rather have Hillary than Jeb if I had to choose. Leftist Republicans like the Bushes neuter conservative Republicans.
    , @Barnard
    I don't vote to cut their taxes. You would rather the people who run the government control all the wealth? How is that any better?
  41. Now, you really *know* that we live in a thoroughly f*cked up world when you have the world’s biggest plutocrat openly and unabashedly pontificating about ‘equality’.

  42. Sideways-in On-Topic

    Down-to-earth Sabine Hossenfelder (https://twitter.com/skdh) writes in Nautilus Magazine (a popular science mag with some good stuff, some bad stuff, certainly artistic value, and no addies which is encountering cash flow problems as I hear):

    She’s not baying at the Moon with the rest of the mangy hounds:

    Damore’s memo strikes me as a pamphlet produced by a well-meaning, but also utterly clueless, young white man. He didn’t deserve to get fired for this. He deserved maybe a slap on the too-quickly typing fingers. But in his world, asking for discussion is apparently enough to get fired.

    I don’t normally write about the underrepresentation of women in science. Reason is I don’t feel fit to represent the underrepresented. I just can’t seem to appropriately suffer in my male-dominated environment. To the extent that one can trust online personality tests, I’m an awkwardly untypical female. It’s probably unsurprising I ended up in theoretical physics.

    There is also a more sinister reason I keep my mouth shut. It’s that I’m afraid of losing what little support I have among the women in science when I fall into their back.

    I’ve lived in the U.S.A. for three years and for three more years in Canada. On several occasions during these years, I’ve been told that my views about women in science are “hardcore,” “controversial,” or “provocative.” Why? Because I stated the obvious: Women are different from men. On that account, I’m totally with Damore. A male-female ratio close to one is not what we should expect in all professions—and not what we should aim at either.

    But the longer I keep my mouth shut, the more I think my silence is a mistake. Because it means leaving the discussion—and with it, power—to those who shout the loudest. Like CNBC. Which wants you to be “shocked” by Damore’s memo in a rather transparent attempt to produce outrage and draw clicks. Are you outraged yet?

    The biggest problem with Damore’s memo, however, is that he doesn’t understand what makes a company successful. If a significant fraction of employees think that diversity is important, then it is important. No further justification is needed for this.

    The whole thing is here: Outraged By the Google Diversity Memo? I Want You to Think About It

  43. Deep State.

  44. Who anointed CEOs as the arbiters of morality? Did we elect these clowns? Some of them are the most immoral SOBs on earth. They want Trump to rearrange the economy for them…not us!

  45. I will say this much about the old school Hollywood Leftists, deluded Stalinists that they were – what they did required a certain amount of courage in an era when being a Communist was not exactly a popular thing to do. Today’s Hollywood Leftists seem to go with whatever is popular in the blue state crowd. The authors of the First Amendment understood (and you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand this) that protection is needed mainly for politically UNPOPULAR speech. If what you are saying is already popular, it doesn’t need protection from the government or anyone else.

    The current situation reminds me of an old Cold War era joke – an American is telling a Soviet that we have free speech in America – anyone who wants to can demonstrate against the President of the United States. The Communists shrugs him off – “We have the same thing in Russia. Any time I want to, I can also demonstrate against the President of the United States!”.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    New version.

    American: In America, we get beaten up by mobs if we demonstrate in support of our president.

    Russian: In old USSR, we also used to get beaten up by mobs if we demonstrated in support of American president.

  46. @reiner Tor

    to speak truth to power
     
    They have no self-awareness.

    I disagree with this. I think it can entirely be explained by a lack of shame.

    Imagine being you, just as self-aware as the real you, but motivated by an unquenchable lust for money and power. You would say stuff like this knowing full well that it’s absurd, but since the peasants eat it up, you happily say it. Is that hard to imagine?

    You don’t get to the peaks of power without a whole lot of ruthlessness, and ruthlessness often shows itself through sappy virtue signalling.

  47. @CCZ

    "These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
     
    That means they are talking to themselves.

    But I don't think that they will be talking about one great moral issue:

    "The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time."
     

    Lol. What are you stuck in 2011? In the Current Year, such concerns are quaint. The Real Menace is white people who don’t want to become a hated and exploited minority in their own country. Focusing on reducing income inequality makes you objectively pro-Nazi.

  48. @Cagey Beast
    And maybe while O'Brien tortures Winston Smith for his unearned White privilege, he'll accuse him of "gentrifying pain"?

    https://twitter.com/martian_munk/status/898623273080160256

    This is very encouraging because it shows you that the Coalition of the Fringes is inherently unstable. If, God forbid, they would ever take full power, they would immediately fall upon each other like wolves as they each grabbed for their share of the spoils – “I have more Diversity Pokemon Points than you do, my saints are holier than your saints and I deserve more goodies than you.” Of course, by this point, it might be a Pyrrhic victory – the country would be destroyed in the process – see Venezuela.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Yes and the key to breaking this Coalition of the Fringes is taking enough of the White ladies away from them. If there is any hope ... it lies in the ladies. Unfortunately, the White girls are like Julia and the other Women's Anti-Sex League system loyalists.
  49. @bomag

    We’ve had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren’t naturally seen as our superiors
     
    Hunter - gatherers just redistribute from anyone seen as rich. Modern society with its large buildings, ships and such required the concentration of wealth; thus the "do not covet" laws. Indulging the rich is a rather new concept in the grand sweep.

    IIRC, thete was a sedentary tribe in the Pac NW that mostly lived off salmon but didn’t have much agriculture. Every year the wealthier people would donate to poorer people, and the more you donated the more social prestige you got.

  50. The culture war is a material part of any ambitious corporation’s plans. I’ll give you an example that explains why.

    In the old days, Dad was the guy who said, “We’re not going to Disneyland this year. We need to put the money toward Junior’s college fund.” Traditional notions of family gave Dad the juice he needed to take a stand like this.

    So corporations had to destroy Dad. Now, he probably isn’t even on the scene, but if he is, he has to pander to everyone, because if Mom doesn’t like it she can just walk out the door and take the kids and the money. And the kids have been emboldened by media portrayals to stand up to Dad and undermine him if they don’t get what they want. Plus, Junior can borrow money from Uncle Sam to go to college. No Dad needed.

    So everyone goes to Disneyland every year now. What corporation wouldn’t like that?

    • Agree: L Woods
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Back then lots of parents didn't have a college fund for Junior. They figured if he wanted to go he could afford it himself.

    And he could have.
  51. @CCZ
    Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee.

    Starbucks Founder Questions Country's 'Moral Fiber'

    SEATTLE - Starbucks founder and chairman Howard Schultz says the events surrounding a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend have put the "moral fiber" of the country in question.

    "The moral fiber, the values, and what we as a country have stood for is literally hanging in the abyss," Schultz told employees. "We are at a critical juncture in American history. That is not an exaggeration. We are at and facing a crucible in which our daily life is being challenged and being questioned about what is right and what is wrong."

    "What we witnessed this past weekend ... is against every sense of what is right," he said. "My fear is not only that this behavior is being given permission and license, but its conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face."

    Telling employees he was speaking to them "as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent," Schultz said it's hard to remain optimistic about the country's future "in the midst of such a storm," but he still is.
     
    “...conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.” I guess he just missed all those antifas.

    He needs a dose of Pappy O'Daniel:

    http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=M4RS&type=Movies&movie=O_Brother_Where_Art_Thou&quote=moralfiber.txt&file=moralfiber.m4r

    “Fellow Americans” is the new “fellow white people”

    Is there a list of powerful people of Hebrewness with dual citizenship?

  52. Larry Summers, who should know better, is another example: https://goo.gl/zGtFx2

    When you get right down to it liberals are cowards, and corporations it turns out are more cowardly still. Fortunately, cowards can be defeated.

  53. @Wilkey
    I have to ask again for the 8,000th time: why do we support cutting these guys' taxes?

    In all of recorded history business has never been so profitable. Their profits as a share of GNP are at 60+ year highs. The only reason we don't call these guys robber barons is because they're disproportionately Jewish and are really good at spouting social justice pieties. They make the original robber barons look like paupers. They pretend to earn their profits in places like Puerto Rico and Ireland in order to avoid paying taxes to the United States.

    Their biggest success has been to destroy any semblance of a party that purports to represent white interests. If I vote Democrat I have to vote for a party that wants to flood the country with tens of millions of minorities and give them more legal rights than me. If I vote for Republicans I have to vote for assholes like Orrin Hatch who only wants to cut taxes for rich people and is only slightly more conservative on social issues than the Democrats.

    > why do we support cutting these guys’ taxes?

    Because if we don’t, it’s easier than ever for them to take even more of their money elsewhere?

    Imagine there’s no countries,
    And no taxation too….

  54. @Anonymous
    https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/17/16162226/corporations-replacing-churches-americas-conscience

    Are corporations becoming the new arbiters of public morality?

    ... what’s remarkable is not the decision of an individual company — Airbnb, say, or Google — to make a principled and visible choice to ally its personal brand with a given set of values, but rather the prevailing winds of cultural change. The remarkable thing here is the overall climate that makes it profitable for them to make it.

    ... Once, a company might have sold sex, or wealth; the opportunity that buying this product would make you into the person you want to be. (Just remember Mad Men’s Don Draper’s famous maxim, “What you call love was invented by guys like me to sell nylons.”) Now, they sell a community-based form of virtue.

    ... But, in practice, the reinforcement the company provides — demanding the spending of money as a ritualistic as well as transactional act, fostering communal interactions with its fans on social media — is less unilateral. It’s not just virtue-signaling, but virtue-creating.
     

    Needless to say, they don't explore the idea that under capitalism a virtue -- like being pro-immigration -- might be boosted because it's good for business.

    “Corporations replacing churches as America’s conscience.”

    I can see this as a future case study at the Harvard Business School: “How to open yourself to hostile takeover if you don’t prioritize the bottom line.” That’s one of the great things about capitalism!

    Only government sets the rules of the game and, once set, those are the ones you have to play by. If we want real reform in America it is the rules of the game we must change: on trade, on immigration, on the length of the working day, one the way capital and labor are taxed and/or subsidized.

  55. @Jack D
    This is very encouraging because it shows you that the Coalition of the Fringes is inherently unstable. If, God forbid, they would ever take full power, they would immediately fall upon each other like wolves as they each grabbed for their share of the spoils - "I have more Diversity Pokemon Points than you do, my saints are holier than your saints and I deserve more goodies than you." Of course, by this point, it might be a Pyrrhic victory - the country would be destroyed in the process - see Venezuela.

    Yes and the key to breaking this Coalition of the Fringes is taking enough of the White ladies away from them. If there is any hope … it lies in the ladies. Unfortunately, the White girls are like Julia and the other Women’s Anti-Sex League system loyalists.

  56. @22pp22
    You don't need to live in the USA to see that a putsch is taking place and the most powerful man in the world is being pushed out of office because:

    1). He is a Kremlin agent.
    2). He is a Nazi

    The NYT takes these two allegations, unproven and frankly silly, as a given, while Seth Richard's convenient death goes uninvestigated.

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts. The rest of the world needs to unite against you and fence you off. Then you can scream and shout about transgender bathroom right until your heads explode.

    You spread death and destruction and wear a smug of smug self-satisfied arrogance on your faces as you do it. Any regime you don't like, no matter how popular, can be changed and who cares about 'collateral damage'. You take Saudi and Israeli money simultaneously and see no contradiction in this.

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    USA go away!

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts.

    Just as the Soviet Union did ≠ the Russians, the warmongering, PC-Police-State US Feral Government ≠ the Americans. Is that too hard to understand for you?

    OTOH, the way people write even on this board, some seem to want MORE Feral Gov’t, and think that it’ll all be fine, so long as it’s THEIR more Feral Gov’t (like a battered husband, say a Bill Clinton, they’ve got bite marks on their arms, pieces of Whitehouse china lodged in their skulls, bacterial infections from deep scratches in the scrotal area, yet still they come back for more … even support their wives for Senatorial and Presidential positions.) There are shelters for you kinds of people, you know that, right!!?

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    I can’t really argue with that. Where do you live, 22pp22? If it were anywhere of which you could say better about, I’d have probably moved there already. How many guns do people own, in general? (Just asking.)

  57. @elmer t. jones
    Here is an inspiring stock photo promoting gay hookup culture that appears on the Chase login page :

    https://employmentgame.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/chasebro.jpg

    No wonder the men tellers seem to always want my phone number along with the usual account # and HIV records when I go cash a check! Long electronic banking.

    BTW, Chase branches seem to be co-located with pet shops a lot. What’s up with that?

  58. @Cagey Beast
    And maybe while O'Brien tortures Winston Smith for his unearned White privilege, he'll accuse him of "gentrifying pain"?

    https://twitter.com/martian_munk/status/898623273080160256

    One thing Airstrip One didn’t suffer from was Diversity. Orwell never imagined England importing millions of non-whites, nor did Kubrick in Clockwork Orange.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Yes, neither of them predicted the pathological love of the exotic stranger amongst Outer Party and Inner Party types. Essentially, they didn't predict the West would choose this method of suicide.
  59. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    All these people no longer care about what’s good for the country but rather about getting the upper hand in this contest of factions. This is how this country will end, with internal strife that’s so short-sighted that no one cares any longer about keeping the country intact. The US has inflicted color revolutions on other countries, throwing them into strife and chaos. Now the deep state is doing it domestically and this is what it looks like up close. CEOs as patriotic people, what a sick joke.

  60. @CCZ
    Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee.

    Starbucks Founder Questions Country's 'Moral Fiber'

    SEATTLE - Starbucks founder and chairman Howard Schultz says the events surrounding a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend have put the "moral fiber" of the country in question.

    "The moral fiber, the values, and what we as a country have stood for is literally hanging in the abyss," Schultz told employees. "We are at a critical juncture in American history. That is not an exaggeration. We are at and facing a crucible in which our daily life is being challenged and being questioned about what is right and what is wrong."

    "What we witnessed this past weekend ... is against every sense of what is right," he said. "My fear is not only that this behavior is being given permission and license, but its conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face."

    Telling employees he was speaking to them "as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent," Schultz said it's hard to remain optimistic about the country's future "in the midst of such a storm," but he still is.
     
    “...conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.” I guess he just missed all those antifas.

    He needs a dose of Pappy O'Daniel:

    http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=M4RS&type=Movies&movie=O_Brother_Where_Art_Thou&quote=moralfiber.txt&file=moralfiber.m4r

    “Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee.”

    Let’s hold them to their vow to hire 10,000 Muslim refugee baristas. Picketing the headquarters in Seattle would be a good way to do it.

    • Replies: @Alden
    Another boycott. Their bacon and chicken sandwiches are pretty good though. So I'll eat breakfast before going out.
  61. @Jack D
    I will say this much about the old school Hollywood Leftists, deluded Stalinists that they were - what they did required a certain amount of courage in an era when being a Communist was not exactly a popular thing to do. Today's Hollywood Leftists seem to go with whatever is popular in the blue state crowd. The authors of the First Amendment understood (and you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand this) that protection is needed mainly for politically UNPOPULAR speech. If what you are saying is already popular, it doesn't need protection from the government or anyone else.

    The current situation reminds me of an old Cold War era joke - an American is telling a Soviet that we have free speech in America - anyone who wants to can demonstrate against the President of the United States. The Communists shrugs him off - "We have the same thing in Russia. Any time I want to, I can also demonstrate against the President of the United States!".

    New version.

    American: In America, we get beaten up by mobs if we demonstrate in support of our president.

    Russian: In old USSR, we also used to get beaten up by mobs if we demonstrated in support of American president.

  62. Question: Can corporations hire whom they please?

    The Left: No! Corporations cannot discriminate on any basis and must offer preferential hiring to “victim” groups. Violation of these complex and ever-changing rules results in serious legal and financial consequences.

    Q: Can corporations offer whatever labor conditions they find feasible?

    The Left: No! Corporations must abide by laws concerning workplace conditions and behaviors. Violation of these complex and ever-changing rules results in serious legal and financial consequences.

    Q: Can corporations decide how to best provide health care and retirements benefits for their workers?

    The Left: No! Corporations must abide by both local and federal rules regulating these issues. Violation of these complex and ever-changing rules results in serious legal and financial consequences.

    Q: Can corporations offer IQ testing to uncover the best candidates for employment?

    The Left: No! This leads to disparate impact and cannot be tolerated, thus hiring is regulated. Violation of these complex and ever-changing rules results in serious legal and financial consequences.

    Q: Can corporations selectively censor those whom they may consider to be promoting “hate speech”?

    The Left: Yes! Corporations are private entities and are not subject to regulation. They can do as they wish.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  63. @CCZ

    "These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”
     
    That means they are talking to themselves.

    But I don't think that they will be talking about one great moral issue:

    "The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time."
     

    Needless to say, what we’re seeing is “speaking power to truth.” As usual the NYT turns things upside down.

    The guy speaking “truth”. Someone worth 5 billion who controls the thoughts of more than half of the US population and can easily crush his ideological opponents.

    The guy holding “power.” A blue-collar worker who makes $30,000/year and wants to preserve his cultural heritage while hordes of state-protected antifas attempt to club him to death.

    Note to $PLC intern. I came to the United States as an adult, having previously lived in four other countries. I have no connection whatsoever with Southerners who oppose the destruction of Confederate statues. Yet, I strongly believe that they – just like any other ethnic group – have a right to preserve cultural artifacts that symbolize their ancestral past.

  64. @Harry Baldwin
    One thing Airstrip One didn't suffer from was Diversity. Orwell never imagined England importing millions of non-whites, nor did Kubrick in Clockwork Orange.

    Yes, neither of them predicted the pathological love of the exotic stranger amongst Outer Party and Inner Party types. Essentially, they didn’t predict the West would choose this method of suicide.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Jean Raspail made this prediction in The Camp of the Saints.
  65. The N.Y. Post just had an article about how corporations have spent nearly $4 trillion on stock buybacks since 2008. This is money that could have gone into more research and development, or could — imagine! — have gone into hiring more people or paying people more money. Instead, this vast sum of cash has gone into raising stock prices, which primarily benefits the 1% and does little at all to help the working classes.

    Why is this even legal?

    • Replies: @StillCARealist
    interesting. why would they do this unless they thought it would ultimately help their companies? Maybe in the long run it's more helpful than spending it in other ways. Enlighten us.
  66. Anonymous [AKA "WindMill"] says:

    “Larry Summers, who should know better, is another example”

    Past: science undermines Christian religious beliefs –> science good. Clarence Darrow is a hero.

    Present: science undermines liberal egalitarian beliefs –> science bad. Charles Murray is a villain.

  67. @neutral
    I don't think I have to add anything on this site about the ridiculous idea that these CEOs are "speaking truth to power". However, I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe, that corporations are now some kind of powerless people standing up to this mighty threat. If this is what they sincerely believe then things are worse than I have ever imagined are possible.

    “that corporations are now some kind of powerless people standing up to this mighty threat.”

    But this is exactly what the corporatist, sometimes called the libertarian, right believed or has claimed to believe throughout my life time.

  68. “In this maelstrom, the most clarifying voice has been the voice of business,” he said. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”

    Yeah, big risk. What Richard Spencer said about antifa, could be applied to these CEOs:

    “They are not speaking truth to power. They are power, speaking.”

  69. @J.C.
    Top CEOs are pulling back their engagement with Federal officials, while maintaining their engagement with the anti-capitalist vanguard limited to the payment of quasi-extortion contributions to the progressive machinery – non-profit social activist foundations and similar vehicles – and to the statement of public declarations of support for progressive values in the corporate code of conduct.

    The pull back is likely a result of increased uncertainty about the standards under which their code of conduct will be judged in the future under emerging political actors.

    Independently from public statements and political contributions, enhancing equity shareholder value is the fundamental guiding principle of contemporary CEOs. The perception that corporate management is operating under increased political uncertainty is most likely occurring at the same time as the perception of risk and uncertainty in other business and economic conditions is rising, in a highly correlated shift towards risk aversion across all asset classes in the financial markets.

    In the years following the 2008 financial crisis the economy and the stock market have made progress towards recovering from the deep bottom in which the economy and the financial markets had fallen. As the scope for further progress is increasingly constrained by fundamental scarcities – of labor productivity and of rewarding capital investment opportunities – uncertainty is more elevated. All this adds up to a historically notable period of social change, an emerging counter-culture, economic stagnation and financial irrational exuberance. A traumatic generational transition that exposes gaps in the nation.

    Reversion to historical average levels of uncertainty and sociopolitical volatility will allow the worst of the emerging changes to be discarded in the future, provided that our institutions maintain continuity with our historical roots. If our connection with history is rewritten, recalibrating our historical standards, reversion to lower uncertainty becomes less certain.

    The future could play out in a very wide range of potential scenarios, and the CEOs are reacting by pulling back on their perceived risk exposure. Increased risk aversion is not auspicious for the prospects of financial market's progress and stability.

    “Independently from public statements and political contributions, enhancing equity shareholder value is the fundamental guiding principle of contemporary CEOs.”

    Slightly off topic, this, and the entire lengthy post around it, is simply bulshit. As is the case of bullshit, thought you here this often its hard to argue against it because its unclear what the statement means.

    But the best way to tackle bullshit is probably to add needed items of context. Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. “Enhancing shareholder calue” was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don’t have shareholders.

    Also the trend has been for the CEOs themselves to be major shareholders in their own companies in the form of stock options awarded for their compensation.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Alden
    That's probably why they keep dividends so low. Screw all the stock holders except for themselves who get the shares for free as "bonuses"
    , @Jack D

    Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. “Enhancing shareholder calue” was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don’t have shareholders.
     
    This is just not true and hasn't been for well over a century. In the very early days of corporations, each charter had to be approved by the state legislature, 1 by 1, and the legislature could consider whether it was really in the public interest to give you a charter, but since the late 19th century states have all adopted "permissive" corporation laws - anyone can form a corporation for any reason (for pure money making reasons) without getting government permission. And the directors indeed (and unlike in some other countries) have a "fiduciary duty" to protect the interest of the shareholders and no one BUT the shareholders, whose money they are entrusted with taking care of. They are not supposed to operate businesses as charities for the benefit of the public or the company's workers or SJWs or anyone else - their job is to make money for the shareholders.
  70. So the NY Times is getting even more open about the scam:

    “If its my sect doing the deed, it can’t be a crime.”

    Or perhaps we should nod wisely as the NY Times preaches: “let the Pharisees control everything and all will be OK”.

    Let’s remember that the NY Times has been pushing the corruption and wars of the sect for decades.

    The New York Times’ role in promoting war on Iraq
    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/23/1079939624187.html

    And that includes the corruption of Dimon.

    Jamie Dimon: America’s Least-Hated Banker
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/magazine/05Dimon-t.html?mcubz=3&mcubz=3

    Now We Know. JPMorgan Chase is Worse Than Enron
    https://ourfuture.org/20140107/its-official-jpmorgan-chase-is-worse-than-enron

    Time to clean the sect out of “our” government, media and politics.

  71. @Achmed E. Newman

    Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said ....
     
    This guy is being touted as someone to listen to about morality?!! Holy moley. I don't know too many of the details, but as far as Big Finance reaming the American people, I've read enough on Zerohedge to know that Jamie Dimon is not someone you'd want to hold up as anyone resembling a decent human being. Go ahead, mention Jamie Dimon in the comment section of any ZH article - I double-dog dare ya'!

    You know, I don't need to tell the NY Times writers where to go - they are on the right road already.

    A former member of his secretarial pool where I once worked said they loved him because he would take them out for adult beverages and pay for it.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, it's easy to be generous like that when you can get the Feral Gov't make the taxpayers bail out your industry for most of a trillion dollars when you take some big losses.

    "You didn't pay for my drinks, Joe, I can't go out with a cheap guy."
    "Sure I did, honey, I just filled out my 1040 the other day. You're quite welcome, now your place or mine?"

  72. And now there is a petition to the WH to formally recognize Antifa as a terrorist organization:

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/formally-recognize-antifa-terrorist-organization-0

  73. @Anonymous
    "I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe"

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. That explains the hypocrisy between now and yesteryear concerning corporate influence (and everything else):

    Past: corporations stigmatized as being conservative --> corporations bad.

    Present: corporations police speech the establishment legally can't --> corporations good.

    There is no contradiction here. They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    Religion.

    Past: Christian Right supported conservatives --> organized religion is bad.

    Present: Muslims and their descendants will vote against conservatives --> Islam good.

    Climate Change.

    Past: white voters don't care about fringe environmental issues --> environmentalism good.

    Present: limiting immigration would mitigate Climate Change but help conservatives --> environmentalism is good but we shouldn't do anything about environmental issues, except close down coal jobs in conservative-voting areas, sign unenforceable climate deals that will probably fail, and increase immigration to the United States.

    War.

    Past: people being killed might vote liberal if they were here in the us, people doing the killing are majority white --> war is bad.

    Present: people who might be killed would vote conservative if located in the US (white Russians) --> war against Russia is good.

    Free Speech.

    Past: vast majority of Americans are non-fringe whites and could censor speech if they didn't particularly like it --> free speech is good (to prevent liberals from losing their rights).

    Present: liberals have the power to censor speech without recourse, free speech is undermining the liberal narrative --> free speech is bad.

    Violence.

    Past: violence is bad because it could be used against liberals by the majority ~conservative population --> violence is bad.

    Present: violence can be used against opponents of liberals without recourse --> violence is "justified" (see Marco Rubio's tweet).

    Government Spying.

    Past: conservative Bush doing the spying --> spying bad.

    Present: Obama/anti-Trump Deep State doing the spying --> spying good or at least a non-issue.

    Poverty

    Past: some poor whites voted democrat --> socialism good.

    Present: most poor whites don't vote democrat --> corporatism isn't really that bad (Hillary: "sure, I'll break up the big banks, wink wink").

    Multiculturalism.

    Past: country mostly white, blacks lived in conservative areas --> integration, busing, diversity...all good everywhere.

    Present: country increasingly non-white everywhere, too many blacks live in liberal areas --> integration bad because that's cultural appropriation - also deport blacks to the heartland.

    As you can see, Liberals aren't really hard to understand, despite all the articles from high-minded conservative types trying to explain their mystifying hypocrisy. Liberals don't have any core principles other than a primal need advance themselves by proving that they are better than some foil (whites, lower-class "uneducated" types, Southerners). They'll support whatever cause they think allows them to do so while opposing (or changing their minds) about whatever issue they believe either does not serve that purpose or empowers their foil in some way.

    >Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy.

    And? Good for them.

    The only objection to this strategy is that it’s highly effective at destroying enemies.

    Our side needs to adopt the exact same approach.

    Who whom is the only game in town.

    If you’re playing some other game about muh principles and muh truth, you’re going to lose.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    Indeed. This ain't beanbag.
    , @Cagey Beast
    If you’re playing some other game about muh principles and muh truth, you’re going to lose.

    No, that's primitive, magical thinking. Captain Cook didn't sail to the Pacific using his own reality; he used the reality presented to him by the Universe. Ditto every other White man of merit since at least the Renaissance, if not Aristotle. Notice how much better Putin and his team navigate through the world using reality-based policy while the West gets caught up in its own Lie Magic cult. Don't become the enemy to defeat the enemy.
  74. This is a very good example of why I am most definitely not a libertarian. Although I briefly flirted with libertarianism about 25 years ago, I quickly came to see where it was leading to: this. I now consider myself to be a national socialist.

  75. Pontifex Maximus is an important position, why let your enemies hold it?

  76. In a less Orwellian world that would be: “CEOs Speak Power to Truth”

  77. @Cagey Beast
    And maybe while O'Brien tortures Winston Smith for his unearned White privilege, he'll accuse him of "gentrifying pain"?

    https://twitter.com/martian_munk/status/898623273080160256

    OT, but do the blacks et al. complaining about gentrification know that white people built and lived in inner cities first?

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    Gentrification is ethic cleansing.
  78. @Anonymous
    "I have to know if anyone here who has the ability to endure the NYT comments can tell me if this is what all the liberals believe"

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. That explains the hypocrisy between now and yesteryear concerning corporate influence (and everything else):

    Past: corporations stigmatized as being conservative --> corporations bad.

    Present: corporations police speech the establishment legally can't --> corporations good.

    There is no contradiction here. They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.

    Religion.

    Past: Christian Right supported conservatives --> organized religion is bad.

    Present: Muslims and their descendants will vote against conservatives --> Islam good.

    Climate Change.

    Past: white voters don't care about fringe environmental issues --> environmentalism good.

    Present: limiting immigration would mitigate Climate Change but help conservatives --> environmentalism is good but we shouldn't do anything about environmental issues, except close down coal jobs in conservative-voting areas, sign unenforceable climate deals that will probably fail, and increase immigration to the United States.

    War.

    Past: people being killed might vote liberal if they were here in the us, people doing the killing are majority white --> war is bad.

    Present: people who might be killed would vote conservative if located in the US (white Russians) --> war against Russia is good.

    Free Speech.

    Past: vast majority of Americans are non-fringe whites and could censor speech if they didn't particularly like it --> free speech is good (to prevent liberals from losing their rights).

    Present: liberals have the power to censor speech without recourse, free speech is undermining the liberal narrative --> free speech is bad.

    Violence.

    Past: violence is bad because it could be used against liberals by the majority ~conservative population --> violence is bad.

    Present: violence can be used against opponents of liberals without recourse --> violence is "justified" (see Marco Rubio's tweet).

    Government Spying.

    Past: conservative Bush doing the spying --> spying bad.

    Present: Obama/anti-Trump Deep State doing the spying --> spying good or at least a non-issue.

    Poverty

    Past: some poor whites voted democrat --> socialism good.

    Present: most poor whites don't vote democrat --> corporatism isn't really that bad (Hillary: "sure, I'll break up the big banks, wink wink").

    Multiculturalism.

    Past: country mostly white, blacks lived in conservative areas --> integration, busing, diversity...all good everywhere.

    Present: country increasingly non-white everywhere, too many blacks live in liberal areas --> integration bad because that's cultural appropriation - also deport blacks to the heartland.

    As you can see, Liberals aren't really hard to understand, despite all the articles from high-minded conservative types trying to explain their mystifying hypocrisy. Liberals don't have any core principles other than a primal need advance themselves by proving that they are better than some foil (whites, lower-class "uneducated" types, Southerners). They'll support whatever cause they think allows them to do so while opposing (or changing their minds) about whatever issue they believe either does not serve that purpose or empowers their foil in some way.

    Excellent list. I think many of those ‘turn on a dime’ behaviors is why many people have ceased identifying with liberals. The most egregious and brazen one is clearly their complete turn-around on religion.

    To be fair, there are conservative equivalents:

    Corporations.

    Past: Corporations should have the same protections as people. Government should serve corporate interests because a rising tide lifts all boats. All employment is at will and ‘right to work.’ What’s good for GM is good for America.

    Present: Break up the biggest corporations like Google and Apple because they have too much power!

    States’ Rights or localism.

    Past: The federal government is too big and we need to restore power to the states. Federal agents are ‘jack-booted’ thugs.

    Present: States are making their own laws regarding which drugs to legalize and who they will spend money deporting?? Send the feds in!

    Private employers discriminating against people for their political beliefs.

    Past: Hollywood studio blacklist commies -> good

    Present: SJW / Silicon Valley blacklist libertarians -> bad

    Public figures being de-platformed.

    Past: Van Jones, Dan Rather, etc say mean things about W Bush and made to go away -> good

    Present: Charles Murray and Milo Y prevented from speaking -> bad

    White working class culture.

    Past: White working class votes for New Deal Democrats -> they’re a bunch of trashy hillbillies

    Present: White working class votes for Republicans -> the soul of America

    • Replies: @Lot
    The one thing the American right will never change on: tax cuts for the 1%. Everything else is at least a little flexible.
  79. @Lurker

    Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy. . . . . . . They support whatever they think helps them, and then seek to justify it to using words. This explains the many contradictions of the left.
     
    I've been sparring with libtards over the past couple of days where they shriek with delight over the thought of some WN being locked in prison with violent black homosexual rapists. On another day, on another thread they would be shrieking with horror were anyone to suggest such a phenomenon even existed.

    I used to be a liberal, the endless hypocrisy and illogicality broke me in the end.

    Liberals decry the (imaginary) “rape culture” in society at large, while celebrating the (very real) rape culture in prisons.

  80. They see that globalization is intheir interest. They believe that multiculturalism is in their interest. Of course they promote them.

  81. @27 year old
    >Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy.


    And? Good for them.

    The only objection to this strategy is that it's highly effective at destroying enemies.

    Our side needs to adopt the exact same approach.

    Who whom is the only game in town.

    If you're playing some other game about muh principles and muh truth, you're going to lose.

    Indeed. This ain’t beanbag.

  82. CEOs Speak Truth to Power

    CEOs Speak Truth FOR Power

  83. @Perspective
    Indeed, Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) seems to have infected people outside the US as well. The amount of hate and vitriol directed at him by low information people is astounding, I recall seeing a woman crying after the election because according to her "Hillary deserved to win". I've tried meeting some of these people half way, but it's pointless because as soon as you don't jump on the I hate Trump band wagon they start foaming at the mouth.

    My sister was in Europe for 5 weeks this summer, mostly in France. She said the French newspapers were as obsessed with hatred of Trump as American papers. The headlines were Trump, Trump, Trump.

    I can’t wait till the next election cycle with Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris all battling to attract the most anti White voters.

    I believe that Trump will be re elected by us White deplorables just to show the media and the elites that we are not their brainwashed empty vessels.

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    Interestingly enough, Edward Luttwak agrees with you: https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/trump-dynasty-luttwak/
    , @Jay Fink
    My impression is that Bernie Sanders was focused on economic populism not identity politics. This is why a lot of SJW types hated him.
  84. @eD
    "Independently from public statements and political contributions, enhancing equity shareholder value is the fundamental guiding principle of contemporary CEOs."

    Slightly off topic, this, and the entire lengthy post around it, is simply bulshit. As is the case of bullshit, thought you here this often its hard to argue against it because its unclear what the statement means.

    But the best way to tackle bullshit is probably to add needed items of context. Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. "Enhancing shareholder calue" was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don't have shareholders.

    Also the trend has been for the CEOs themselves to be major shareholders in their own companies in the form of stock options awarded for their compensation.

    That’s probably why they keep dividends so low. Screw all the stock holders except for themselves who get the shares for free as “bonuses”

  85. I’m wondering exactly what these CEOs are risking by speaking cant. I can’t imagine that the least politically courageous entities in the country would ever say anything that wasn’t calculated to enhance the bottom line. If they calculated that Nazism sells, they would be for it – and in the past, they were – notably, IBM’s Watson arranging structures to do punch card business with Nazi Germany, codifying such records as the gold teeth of exterminated Jews, when it was seen as ascendant. In Germany itself, capitalists prostituted themselves in service of the Nazi power. It doesn’t take much courage to rant and preen against Nazism, a confused and contradictory ideology that was utterly defeated for the majority over seventy years ago. On the other hand, a system of inverted totalitarianism, where corporations control government and establish their own de facto public laws, is analogous to fascism, per se. Wearing black hoods instead of white doesn’t alter the role of street violence terror tactics, except perhaps in the sense that wearing black makes you good, white bad, for exactly the same behavior of cowardly intimidation. An updated feature is that the doxxing reserved for opponents is forestalled by masking identity.

    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    • Replies: @Joe Magarac

    I’m wondering exactly what these CEOs are risking by speaking cant. I can’t imagine that the least politically courageous entities in the country would ever say anything that wasn’t calculated to enhance the bottom line.
     
    That they expect that side to win big after Trump is out (whether by coming to the end of his term or something more precipitous).
  86. @Luke Lea
    "Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee."

    Let's hold them to their vow to hire 10,000 Muslim refugee baristas. Picketing the headquarters in Seattle would be a good way to do it.

    Another boycott. Their bacon and chicken sandwiches are pretty good though. So I’ll eat breakfast before going out.

  87. @Wilkey
    I have to ask again for the 8,000th time: why do we support cutting these guys' taxes?

    In all of recorded history business has never been so profitable. Their profits as a share of GNP are at 60+ year highs. The only reason we don't call these guys robber barons is because they're disproportionately Jewish and are really good at spouting social justice pieties. They make the original robber barons look like paupers. They pretend to earn their profits in places like Puerto Rico and Ireland in order to avoid paying taxes to the United States.

    Their biggest success has been to destroy any semblance of a party that purports to represent white interests. If I vote Democrat I have to vote for a party that wants to flood the country with tens of millions of minorities and give them more legal rights than me. If I vote for Republicans I have to vote for assholes like Orrin Hatch who only wants to cut taxes for rich people and is only slightly more conservative on social issues than the Democrats.

    “If I vote Democrat I have to vote for a party that wants to flood the country with tens of millions of minorities and give them more legal rights than me.”

    Most Republicans in Congress want to do that too.

    I voted for Trump, but would probably rather have Hillary than Jeb if I had to choose. Leftist Republicans like the Bushes neuter conservative Republicans.

  88. “In this maelstrom, the most clarifying voice has been the voice of business,” he said. “These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power.”

    A more honest version:

    “In this tempest in a teapot, the most potent voice has been the voice of business,” he said. “These C.E.O.s have taken the the easy option of using power to silence truth.”

  89. Prediction: The next industry to get on the social justice/CEOs-Are-Moral bandwagon will be … real estate developers… all those racist civil war battlefields from 70 BK (before Martin Luther King) that only racist dying white males are interested in. Who else but a racist would be interested in preserving them, after all they are breeding grounds for white nationalists.

    Civil war graveyards as well… especially confederate ones.. We can plow over the past and build high density housing for vibrant immigrants that are erasing hate.

  90. @eD
    "Independently from public statements and political contributions, enhancing equity shareholder value is the fundamental guiding principle of contemporary CEOs."

    Slightly off topic, this, and the entire lengthy post around it, is simply bulshit. As is the case of bullshit, thought you here this often its hard to argue against it because its unclear what the statement means.

    But the best way to tackle bullshit is probably to add needed items of context. Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. "Enhancing shareholder calue" was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don't have shareholders.

    Also the trend has been for the CEOs themselves to be major shareholders in their own companies in the form of stock options awarded for their compensation.

    Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. “Enhancing shareholder calue” was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don’t have shareholders.

    This is just not true and hasn’t been for well over a century. In the very early days of corporations, each charter had to be approved by the state legislature, 1 by 1, and the legislature could consider whether it was really in the public interest to give you a charter, but since the late 19th century states have all adopted “permissive” corporation laws – anyone can form a corporation for any reason (for pure money making reasons) without getting government permission. And the directors indeed (and unlike in some other countries) have a “fiduciary duty” to protect the interest of the shareholders and no one BUT the shareholders, whose money they are entrusted with taking care of. They are not supposed to operate businesses as charities for the benefit of the public or the company’s workers or SJWs or anyone else – their job is to make money for the shareholders.

    • Replies: @Clark Westwood

    This is just not true and hasn’t been for well over a century. In the very early days of corporations, each charter had to be approved by the state legislature, 1 by 1, and the legislature could consider whether it was really in the public interest to give you a charter, but since the late 19th century states have all adopted “permissive” corporation laws – anyone can form a corporation for any reason (for pure money making reasons) without getting government permission. And the directors indeed (and unlike in some other countries) have a “fiduciary duty” to protect the interest of the shareholders and no one BUT the shareholders, whose money they are entrusted with taking care of. They are not supposed to operate businesses as charities for the benefit of the public or the company’s workers or SJWs or anyone else – their job is to make money for the shareholders.
     
    Agreed. In the old days, you were at the mercy of the legislature if you wanted to form a corporation. You had to have influence and/or money to get the legislators to grant you a charter. That changed with the advent of "general" corporation laws. And legislatures pretty much stopped worrying about whether a given corporation would advance public welfare about 200 years ago. (Or, to put it differently, by about 200 years ago, it had come to be generally accepted that if a business was legal, it ipso facto advanced public welfare.)

    Just one technical point -- in the U.S., states started adopting general corporation laws as early as the 1830s. It's confusing because it took many years for most states to prohibit incorporation by special acts. Thus, for as long as 50-60 years, depending on the state, someone wishing to form a corporation had the choice of using the general corporation law or approaching the legislature for a special act. By about 1900, every state had ceased to permit formations by special act.
  91. @elmer t. jones
    Here is an inspiring stock photo promoting gay hookup culture that appears on the Chase login page :

    https://employmentgame.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/chasebro.jpg

    Funny how both of them look quite swishy by earlier standards but look ridiculously rugged and straight by Millennial standards. That’s what the Millennial equivalents of Jean Gabin or Robert Shaw look like.

  92. e says:

    The CEOs sat on the POTUS’ councils, playing nice with him, to influence as much as they could the course his NAFTA talks that began Thursday. When they saw they’d had no effect on his plans, they let loose with their inanities. TRUMP NAFTA TEAM didn’t flinch. Mexico, Canada and of course China not be happy. Of course, it’s fair to say that Trump invited them to sit on those councils only to play nice with them to. When NAFTA talks began and they started quitting, he disbanded them: Bye, don’t need you.

  93. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan said, “The equal treatment of all people is one of our nation’s bedrock principles.”
     
    Counterpoint: Interesting NYT Sunday Review piece that admits that the United States wasn’t founded to be a Zeroth Amendment dumping ground, among other things.

    What White Nationalism Gets Right About American History

    Condensed snips from the article:

    President Trump stepped in to salvage the message that the rally organizers had originally hoped to project.

    Until Trump’s comments, few critics seemed to identify the larger relationship the alt-right sees between its beliefs and the ideals of the American founders.

    The most fundamental legislative goal of the white nationalist movement is to limit nonwhite immigration. It is important to remember that such limits were in place during the lifetimes of many current white nationalists; it was the default status until the 1960s. In the 1790s, the first naturalization laws of the United States Congress limited citizenship to a “free white person.”

    [Trump’s] comments supporting the rally gave new purpose to the white nationalist movement, unlike any endorsement it has ever received. Among its followers, being at that rally will become something to brag about, and some people who didn’t want to be associated with extremism will now see the cause as more mainstream. When the president doesn’t provide condemnation that he has been pressed to give, what message does that send but encouragement?

    The United States was founded as a white nationalist country, and that legacy remains today.

    Sometimes it seems that the white nationalists are most honest about the very real foundation of white supremacy upon which our nation was built.
     

    The subject of the diversity visa lottery came up recently at the 4th circuit. One judge was stunned after hearing about the program. He never heard of it, doesn’t recall voting for it and was incredulous that such a program exists.

  94. @reiner Tor

    to speak truth to power
     
    They have no self-awareness.

    My experience with lefties is that they are trained puppies. Period.

  95. @27 year old
    >Liberals believe whatever helps their side and harms their enemy.


    And? Good for them.

    The only objection to this strategy is that it's highly effective at destroying enemies.

    Our side needs to adopt the exact same approach.

    Who whom is the only game in town.

    If you're playing some other game about muh principles and muh truth, you're going to lose.

    If you’re playing some other game about muh principles and muh truth, you’re going to lose.

    No, that’s primitive, magical thinking. Captain Cook didn’t sail to the Pacific using his own reality; he used the reality presented to him by the Universe. Ditto every other White man of merit since at least the Renaissance, if not Aristotle. Notice how much better Putin and his team navigate through the world using reality-based policy while the West gets caught up in its own Lie Magic cult. Don’t become the enemy to defeat the enemy.

  96. “Political Correctness is the morality of the market square.”

    I first wrote that pithy statement more than ten years ago on a different and sadly now defunct blog. It was true then and is ever more obviously true today. Our oligarchic masters are all-in for PC because it lubricates their wealth absorbing mechanisms. They would view any sort of national, racial, tribal, or credal dispute among their “consumers” much the same way that a rancher would view a rivalry between two bulls, and their solution is the same: geld them and shear them of their horns.

    It is a fact now indisputable that corporate interests are totally aligned with the dictates of cultural Marxism, to their mutual benefit. Therefore it is a matter of tactical necessity and ideological consistency that nationalists be also anti-corporatists. There is no getting around this. It is a decisive characteristic of the age we live in. This is what Oswald Spengler referred to, in many moving passages, as the battle between money and blood. It marks the period in the history of a civilization when a not completely POZ’d Caesar (a “nationalist”) finally breaks the stranglehold of the Optimates (i.e. the Big Money party, the party of crony capitalism and cultural Marxism).

    Donald Trump won his improbable victory precisely because the American people saw in his campaign the promise of such a Caesar, but he turned out to be as black, weak, and corrupted as an emphysemic lung. We will have to find a different leader, but make no mistake about this: this battle is the great and determinative political struggle of our age.

  97. @Wilkey
    I have to ask again for the 8,000th time: why do we support cutting these guys' taxes?

    In all of recorded history business has never been so profitable. Their profits as a share of GNP are at 60+ year highs. The only reason we don't call these guys robber barons is because they're disproportionately Jewish and are really good at spouting social justice pieties. They make the original robber barons look like paupers. They pretend to earn their profits in places like Puerto Rico and Ireland in order to avoid paying taxes to the United States.

    Their biggest success has been to destroy any semblance of a party that purports to represent white interests. If I vote Democrat I have to vote for a party that wants to flood the country with tens of millions of minorities and give them more legal rights than me. If I vote for Republicans I have to vote for assholes like Orrin Hatch who only wants to cut taxes for rich people and is only slightly more conservative on social issues than the Democrats.

    I don’t vote to cut their taxes. You would rather the people who run the government control all the wealth? How is that any better?

  98. @Jack D

    Corporations are actually chartered by state governments, supposedly for public purposes. “Enhancing shareholder calue” was never their putative purpose. The purpose of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and family style businesses, could be to make their owners rich, but they don’t have shareholders.
     
    This is just not true and hasn't been for well over a century. In the very early days of corporations, each charter had to be approved by the state legislature, 1 by 1, and the legislature could consider whether it was really in the public interest to give you a charter, but since the late 19th century states have all adopted "permissive" corporation laws - anyone can form a corporation for any reason (for pure money making reasons) without getting government permission. And the directors indeed (and unlike in some other countries) have a "fiduciary duty" to protect the interest of the shareholders and no one BUT the shareholders, whose money they are entrusted with taking care of. They are not supposed to operate businesses as charities for the benefit of the public or the company's workers or SJWs or anyone else - their job is to make money for the shareholders.

    This is just not true and hasn’t been for well over a century. In the very early days of corporations, each charter had to be approved by the state legislature, 1 by 1, and the legislature could consider whether it was really in the public interest to give you a charter, but since the late 19th century states have all adopted “permissive” corporation laws – anyone can form a corporation for any reason (for pure money making reasons) without getting government permission. And the directors indeed (and unlike in some other countries) have a “fiduciary duty” to protect the interest of the shareholders and no one BUT the shareholders, whose money they are entrusted with taking care of. They are not supposed to operate businesses as charities for the benefit of the public or the company’s workers or SJWs or anyone else – their job is to make money for the shareholders.

    Agreed. In the old days, you were at the mercy of the legislature if you wanted to form a corporation. You had to have influence and/or money to get the legislators to grant you a charter. That changed with the advent of “general” corporation laws. And legislatures pretty much stopped worrying about whether a given corporation would advance public welfare about 200 years ago. (Or, to put it differently, by about 200 years ago, it had come to be generally accepted that if a business was legal, it ipso facto advanced public welfare.)

    Just one technical point — in the U.S., states started adopting general corporation laws as early as the 1830s. It’s confusing because it took many years for most states to prohibit incorporation by special acts. Thus, for as long as 50-60 years, depending on the state, someone wishing to form a corporation had the choice of using the general corporation law or approaching the legislature for a special act. By about 1900, every state had ceased to permit formations by special act.

  99. More on Darren Walker: a gay mulatto member of the Council of Foreign Relations and BFF of Bill de Blasio

    Darren Walker, the president of the Ford Foundation

    Somewhere Henry Ford rolls in his grave.

  100. There is a big downturn coming. Part of it is necessary and good: it will hopefully (nonviolently) deflate the housing bubble and punish the deliriously hyperinflated stock market. But it’s also sonething we’ll have to muddle through, something our side (and President) will have to explain or defend, and an opportunity for bank owning real-life supercreeps to make Trump look incompetant.

    http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/138263440

    http://www.ritcap.com/reports

    “We do not believe it is an appropriate time to add to risk.” — Lord Rothschild, in his latest biannual stockholder report, at both links

  101. @22pp22
    You don't need to live in the USA to see that a putsch is taking place and the most powerful man in the world is being pushed out of office because:

    1). He is a Kremlin agent.
    2). He is a Nazi

    The NYT takes these two allegations, unproven and frankly silly, as a given, while Seth Richard's convenient death goes uninvestigated.

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts. The rest of the world needs to unite against you and fence you off. Then you can scream and shout about transgender bathroom right until your heads explode.

    You spread death and destruction and wear a smug of smug self-satisfied arrogance on your faces as you do it. Any regime you don't like, no matter how popular, can be changed and who cares about 'collateral damage'. You take Saudi and Israeli money simultaneously and see no contradiction in this.

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    USA go away!

    Repeat comment, take II:

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts.

    Just as the Soviet Union did ≠ the Russians, the warmongering, PC-Police-State US Feral Government ≠ the Americans. Is that too hard to understand for you?

    OTOH, the way people write even on this board, some seem to want MORE Feral Gov’t, and think that it’ll all be fine, so long as it’s THEIR more Feral Gov’t (like a battered husband, say a Bill Clinton, they’ve got bite marks on their arms, pieces of Whitehouse china lodged in their skulls, bacterial infections from deep scratches in the scrotal area, yet still they come back for more … even support their wives for Senatorial and Presidential positions.) There are shelters for you kinds of people, you know that, right!!?

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.

    I can’t really argue with that. Where do you live, 22pp22? If it were anywhere about which you could say better stuff, I’d have probably moved there already.

    • Replies: @22pp22
    Cyprus.
  102. Translation: “We in Corporate America have been given the high sign that Trump will be gone by Christmas”

    And he will. Trump, Pence, likely both removed. Either by a coup (most likely now) or Impeachment/Conviction.

    Since Black people are holy, and have absolute moral authority, one of: Maxine Waters; Kamala Harris; or Michelle Obama will be our new “President” aka ruler.

    And it will be pursuing the last White man into the weeds.

    There will be no “re election of Trump,” since the entire: corporate world, media, party structure of the Dems and Republicans, military command, political leadership, anti-fa, university system, and the like are against Straight White Men and Trump. What do we have? Ordinary White men?

    Tiny Duck is correct in that all people of color and White women hate hate hate us. I don’t care about that — its natural and inevitable given that they are manifest failures compared to Straight White Male success at everything save dribbling or running with a ball, grabbing one’s crotch, or uptalking vocal fry while making idiot narcissistic selfies on social media.

    Rather it is their LACK OF FEAR that disturbs me and informs the anti-White frenzy.

    Richard (Soros) Spencer, and the rest manifestly failed completely. It is time to take a new tactic. MAKE CORPORATIONS FEAR US. Very bad things due to bad luck and evil spirits should happen to corporations like Starbucks, Apple, and Goldman Sachs. Such as publicizing tax evasion, money laundering for organized crime, deviant sexual behavior of top execs, and sudden, unexplained and very costly outages due completely again to bad luck and evil spirits. The same should be extended to Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, and Schumer’s niece Amy. Take a page from singer Lana Del Rey who is using “magic” and her prayers and witchcraft to hex Donald Trump. It sure worked! All these prayers and magic witchcraft however need to be done privately out of the public eye since we as White men are not feared enough (yet).

    There is NO possibility of public fear; the “Brave” Neo Nazis and Klan got clobbered and totally owned by the anti-fa who were both better fighters and more numerous. It is time to study successful movements like the Japanese organizations that grew in the 1920s. Private fear is another matter; corporations do not antagonize Anonymous.

  103. @Joe Stalin
    A former member of his secretarial pool where I once worked said they loved him because he would take them out for adult beverages and pay for it.

    Yeah, it’s easy to be generous like that when you can get the Feral Gov’t make the taxpayers bail out your industry for most of a trillion dollars when you take some big losses.

    “You didn’t pay for my drinks, Joe, I can’t go out with a cheap guy.”
    “Sure I did, honey, I just filled out my 1040 the other day. You’re quite welcome, now your place or mine?”

  104. @Achilles

    the swelling confidence of a torch-bearing, swastika-saluting, whites-first movement

    These C.E.O.s have taken the risk to speak truth to power
     
    In the NYT morality play, the "power" these CEOs are risking all to speak truth to is the pathetic tiny collection of swastika-waving plants, dupes and bystanders at Charlottesville.

    These are very small shadow puppets projected onto a giant screen by the MSM in order to gather even greater power into the hands of lunatic Cultural Revolutionaries.

    In fact, the CEOs are like modern-day Schlotbaronen groveling before SJW commissars (to mix historical comparisons) to parrot the totalitarian party line in order to avoid being molested themselves by the SJW fanatics.

    CEOs taking a moral position on anything? Recall that Steve Jobs said that he is in business. If you want to save whales, don’t expect Apple to help you do it.

    The CEOs and Silicon Valley are siding with the Progressives (a.k.a. Communists in other contexts) because they know the Progressives have the support and finances from the international Jewish community.

    The Progressives and their allies are the same people who have been able to topple governments in “color revolutions”. These are the same people who constitute the major portion of the American Deep State. These are the same people to control the MSM in both North America and the European Union. These are the same people who control American foreign policy and are desperately trying to isolate Trump and remove him from the Presidency.

    In short, the CEOs are buying “futures” on who will constitute the government of the United States as we continue the transition to an authoritarian government that is progressively (NPI) coming to resemble the Soviet state. The CEOs are in the process of cutting their deal with the Progressives that will allow them to continue to accumulate obscene wealth in return for giving the Progressives a free hand in the reorganization of American society and the American state.

  105. @elmer t. jones
    Here is an inspiring stock photo promoting gay hookup culture that appears on the Chase login page :

    https://employmentgame.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/chasebro.jpg

    E Michael Jones of Culture Wars Magazine has many good Youtube videos on how corporate America embraces gay culture because it total supports consumerism and usury as opposed to the stale pale male patriarchal family. Why struggle and save when you are not going to leave a posterity and could be very well be dead of some gay related illness by middle age.

    Bye Bye white man.

    It is really sad and depressing.

    As a indication of how far off the rails things have gone in the last fifty years how about this classic commercial that was redone as a huge #1 hit for The Carpenters.

    Crocker Bank “Wedding”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We%27ve_Only_Just_Begun

  106. @Alden
    My sister was in Europe for 5 weeks this summer, mostly in France. She said the French newspapers were as obsessed with hatred of Trump as American papers. The headlines were Trump, Trump, Trump.

    I can't wait till the next election cycle with Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris all battling to attract the most anti White voters.

    I believe that Trump will be re elected by us White deplorables just to show the media and the elites that we are not their brainwashed empty vessels.

    Interestingly enough, Edward Luttwak agrees with you: https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/trump-dynasty-luttwak/

  107. @Fran Macadam
    I'm wondering exactly what these CEOs are risking by speaking cant. I can't imagine that the least politically courageous entities in the country would ever say anything that wasn't calculated to enhance the bottom line. If they calculated that Nazism sells, they would be for it - and in the past, they were - notably, IBM's Watson arranging structures to do punch card business with Nazi Germany, codifying such records as the gold teeth of exterminated Jews, when it was seen as ascendant. In Germany itself, capitalists prostituted themselves in service of the Nazi power. It doesn't take much courage to rant and preen against Nazism, a confused and contradictory ideology that was utterly defeated for the majority over seventy years ago. On the other hand, a system of inverted totalitarianism, where corporations control government and establish their own de facto public laws, is analogous to fascism, per se. Wearing black hoods instead of white doesn't alter the role of street violence terror tactics, except perhaps in the sense that wearing black makes you good, white bad, for exactly the same behavior of cowardly intimidation. An updated feature is that the doxxing reserved for opponents is forestalled by masking identity.

    I’m wondering exactly what these CEOs are risking by speaking cant. I can’t imagine that the least politically courageous entities in the country would ever say anything that wasn’t calculated to enhance the bottom line.

    That they expect that side to win big after Trump is out (whether by coming to the end of his term or something more precipitous).

  108. @Cagey Beast
    Yes, neither of them predicted the pathological love of the exotic stranger amongst Outer Party and Inner Party types. Essentially, they didn't predict the West would choose this method of suicide.

    Jean Raspail made this prediction in The Camp of the Saints.

  109. @Alden
    My sister was in Europe for 5 weeks this summer, mostly in France. She said the French newspapers were as obsessed with hatred of Trump as American papers. The headlines were Trump, Trump, Trump.

    I can't wait till the next election cycle with Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris all battling to attract the most anti White voters.

    I believe that Trump will be re elected by us White deplorables just to show the media and the elites that we are not their brainwashed empty vessels.

    My impression is that Bernie Sanders was focused on economic populism not identity politics. This is why a lot of SJW types hated him.

    • Agree: PiltdownMan
  110. @peterike
    The N.Y. Post just had an article about how corporations have spent nearly $4 trillion on stock buybacks since 2008. This is money that could have gone into more research and development, or could -- imagine! -- have gone into hiring more people or paying people more money. Instead, this vast sum of cash has gone into raising stock prices, which primarily benefits the 1% and does little at all to help the working classes.

    Why is this even legal?

    interesting. why would they do this unless they thought it would ultimately help their companies? Maybe in the long run it’s more helpful than spending it in other ways. Enlighten us.

    • Replies: @Escher
    It's helpful in boosting the stock price in the short term, which is exactly what the executives want, so they can cash out their options and leave. Long term future be damned.
  111. @biz
    Excellent list. I think many of those 'turn on a dime' behaviors is why many people have ceased identifying with liberals. The most egregious and brazen one is clearly their complete turn-around on religion.

    To be fair, there are conservative equivalents:

    Corporations.

    Past: Corporations should have the same protections as people. Government should serve corporate interests because a rising tide lifts all boats. All employment is at will and 'right to work.' What's good for GM is good for America.

    Present: Break up the biggest corporations like Google and Apple because they have too much power!

    States' Rights or localism.

    Past: The federal government is too big and we need to restore power to the states. Federal agents are 'jack-booted' thugs.

    Present: States are making their own laws regarding which drugs to legalize and who they will spend money deporting?? Send the feds in!

    Private employers discriminating against people for their political beliefs.

    Past: Hollywood studio blacklist commies -> good

    Present: SJW / Silicon Valley blacklist libertarians -> bad

    Public figures being de-platformed.

    Past: Van Jones, Dan Rather, etc say mean things about W Bush and made to go away -> good

    Present: Charles Murray and Milo Y prevented from speaking -> bad

    White working class culture.

    Past: White working class votes for New Deal Democrats -> they're a bunch of trashy hillbillies

    Present: White working class votes for Republicans -> the soul of America

    The one thing the American right will never change on: tax cuts for the 1%. Everything else is at least a little flexible.

  112. The guy who made the amazing statement about CEOs speaking Truth to Power is, as the article mentions, the President of the Ford Foundation.

    Nowhere is the degeneration of our culture more complete than in philanthropy. Philanthropy has decided to interpret its mission as being to implement and enforce identity politics. (This guy is himself African-American.)

    What this means of course is that virtually every penny it spends is worthless at best, and destructive most often. Marc Zuckerberg’s $100M effort to improve Newark schools is a poster case for the utter waste of modern day philanthropy. Gates contribution to Africa, whose ultimate effect is to increase the population of Africa manyfold, is likely to engender a humanitarian catastrophe in the future of a scale the world has never before seen.

    These philanthropists seem to look with contempt on projects whose goal might be to preserve beauty.

    Recently I went on a tour of a well known Frank Lloyd Wright house on the shore of Lake Erie, Graycliff. It is a breathtakingly beautiful house, exhibiting all the attention to detail for which Lloyd is famous. But inside it is in disturbing disrepair.

    I couldn’t help but think of the untold billions of money available to contemporary philanthropy going toward futile, virtue signalling projects. Even a very tiny portion of this money could, instead, do great and unquestionable good in restoring such works of beauty.

    I suppose there’s some kind of karma in seeing these modern philanthropists, infected with a sense on their own moral superiority — throw away their money on projects that will earn them only scorn in years to come. Ironically, it is the philanthropists of the past — rich people who rarely pretended in their lifetimes that they had a right to sermonize to the common man — who have created parks, universities, museums, and other institutions of great and lasting value.

  113. @kihowi
    We've had maybe a 100 hundred years where the rich weren't naturally seen as our superiors, but as many aspects of the 20th century that was a weird historical exception and only looked normal to us because we we in it.

    There are other differences. The nobility of old across the Eurasian landmass looked upon merchantry as the lowest occupation

  114. These philanthropists seem to look with contempt on projects whose goal might be to preserve beauty.

    There is an ideological reasons for that:

    1 Communists famously said that Raphael had to be destroyed for communism to flourish

    2 A few weeks ago steve posted something about a harretz journalist bemoaning swiss culture because it was, well, swiss. He literally said their rustic traditional architecture was a barrier to being multicultural- and germany was better because they had universalist architecture.
    3
    the past has to be destroyed and memory wiped out to create our multiculti paradise.

  115. As long as the game is identity politics, which liberals invented and can play better than anyone else, liberal hegemony is assured.
    White power has no future. It is a waste of working class rage. A replay of the Civil War will have the same outcome as the first, only faster and with a liberal police state as aftermath.
    Jamie Dimon and Tim Cook and like-minded Eloi can prattle on about equality because it costs them nothing. But ask them why CEOs like them make from 300 to 500 times what an average worker makes, and you’ll start hearing a different tune.
    The only way to shut up liberals is to take them at their word and start fomenting a movement for income redistribution. “You say you support equality, Tim. Then you will not object to turning over your company to your employees. And Jamie, you believe in equality as well. So you won’t object to the state nationalizing all banks and making them the property of the people.”
    BTW, when Dimon was asked about income inequality, he weaseled out with the observation “that while income inequality has gotten worse, reeling in executive compensation isn’t the answer. He argues that for things to get better for America’s low- and middle-income households, growth is what matters.” (https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/jamie-dimon-inequality-iphones/406186/)

  116. @DFH
    OT, but do the blacks et al. complaining about gentrification know that white people built and lived in inner cities first?

    Gentrification is ethic cleansing.

  117. It seems that the Chinese are laughing at us now:

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Seneca
    Yes, I am a USA citizen who currently lives in China.

    That joke hit home because it reflects trends here in China I am seeing.

    Increasingly, there are articles in newspapers and on the Chinese internet talking about the Cultural Revolution in the USA. Their level of understanding is often pretty nuanced, and sometimes I even wonder if the Chinese authors read Steve's blog... LOL (or perhaps some other Conservative writers like Coulter, Steyn, etc...) Pretty sure at least some of them do.

    In these Chinese articles often White leftists are mocked, and there is a special Chinese word used to describe them (similar to a Chinese version of a combination of the English terms " SWPL"and "SJW").

    On the other hand, I have not read any articles supporting ANTIFA and BLM (though there may be...so I welcome some Chinese commentators who know their culture better than I do to set the record straight if what I am saying is too one sided ). I suspect one reason could be that the Chinese associate ANTIFA, BLM, and the SJW left in the USA with affirmative action which the Chinese feel is unfair and keep some of them and their cousins in the USA out of the best USA schools. On the other hand some young Chinese do love basketball and black music and sports heroes so this could change at least regarding BLM.

    What I do know is that virtually everybody in China, including even the Chinese Communist party,openly admits that the Chinese Cultural Revolution was categorically a huge mistake for China which killed and harmed many innocent people and set back China many years.

    Many Chinese are simply amazed (and not in a good way) at what they see in the USA when they see ANTFA violently acting like the Red guard circa 1960s and trying to enforce SJW ideological orthodoxy.

    I suspect this trend (if it continues and does not die out) is going to be a huge public relations disaster for the image of the USA in China (any maybe elsewhere as well).

    I wonder of the unintended consequences of this cultural revolution in the USA is a PR disaster in the making for the USA and its corporations (ironic given its recent endorsements by CEOs of major corporations) at least among the Chinese. Why? The USA is no longer a "cool" place where freedom reigns , and the USA is making the same mistakes that the Chinese just learned from!. Instead of being a country filled with people they admire, they now realize that the USA is filled with selfish idiots just as dumb, foolish, and easily mislead( who ignorantly mouth moral platitudes and harm others) as the Chinese Red Guard youth of sixty years ago.

    I expect in the near future fewer Apple phones and other products will be sold in China as the "coolness" of the USA brand suffers.

    I also wonder if the current trend continues if there will also be a reduction in future Chinese college students attending schools in the USA . Most Chinese parents who lived through the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution in China want their kids in a safe place not a place that is unstable and has riots courtesy of a USA version of the Red Guard (ANTIFA). This could be a problem for some universities because Chinese students are a considerable revenue source for many America schools since the students often pay full tuition.

    The Chinese are very safety conscious and for the same reason have started to avoid Paris and London as vacation destinations because of safety concerns after all the Muslim terrorist incidents (according to anecdotal evidence and several articles I have read).

    Your country's brand is very import. Overall ANTIFA and the riots at the schools are a symptom of decline in the USA. Safe, prosperous places don't have disruptive riots like these at institutions of higher learning. People do not admire, respect, or buy the products of losers or those who are in decline.

    As others have pointed out numerous times, this will not end well.

    Six months ago, I told a friend of mine who was visiting from the USA (and who is a strong Trump supporter) that I was worried that there would be more deaths as a result of the hateful rhetoric of BLM and ANTIFA. They laughed and said I was too worried. Frankly, the recent events have have made me even more worried. I wonder when the fever break?

    I even wonder if the military will have to step in at some point. Perhaps that is why Trump has surrounded his administration with retired military officers?

    I know I am the type that worries a lot, but the situation just seems to be getting worse and worse.

    I wonder if any Chinese commenters might have a different take on the situation. Even though I live here, I am still an outsider and foreigner and so I am sure I am missing some things.
    , @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
  118. I think people would rather speak power to truth than truth to power.

  119. @CCZ
    Starbucks, now offering hysteria with each cup of overpriced coffee.

    Starbucks Founder Questions Country's 'Moral Fiber'

    SEATTLE - Starbucks founder and chairman Howard Schultz says the events surrounding a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend have put the "moral fiber" of the country in question.

    "The moral fiber, the values, and what we as a country have stood for is literally hanging in the abyss," Schultz told employees. "We are at a critical juncture in American history. That is not an exaggeration. We are at and facing a crucible in which our daily life is being challenged and being questioned about what is right and what is wrong."

    "What we witnessed this past weekend ... is against every sense of what is right," he said. "My fear is not only that this behavior is being given permission and license, but its conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face."

    Telling employees he was speaking to them "as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent," Schultz said it's hard to remain optimistic about the country's future "in the midst of such a storm," but he still is.
     
    “...conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.” I guess he just missed all those antifas.

    He needs a dose of Pappy O'Daniel:

    http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=M4RS&type=Movies&movie=O_Brother_Where_Art_Thou&quote=moralfiber.txt&file=moralfiber.m4r

    “Telling employees he was speaking to them “as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent,” ”

    Prompting one to attempt fathoming any other CEO addressing the troops as a this, a that, a Catholic, and an other. Boggles the mind.

  120. @reiner Tor

    to speak truth to power
     
    They have no self-awareness.

    Or self.

  121. @Arclight
    So on the one hand there is still a very strong anti-corporation strain on the left, but apparently more and more progressives are lining up with the largest and most powerful companies in the land because they have the ability to enforce the speech codes and hiring/firing based on having the right ideology that they would like the government to have.

    What Shouting Thomas said, and yes, you’re right.

    I think what’s happening is that they see that America stands a chance of returning to deals, business, building good things well, etc.

    The left crap we’ve been hearing from the private sector has been coming from mostly the chattering classes in the FIRE economy, media, and big tech.

    MAGA implies building things that these chuckleheads cannot…and moreover every contract to build something big is going to redistribute power dramatically. (This is why, btw, they have stonewalled on infrastructure these past decades. The chattering classes see no way it will profit them. What profits them is blaat.)

    So they are recasting their kind of corporate power–media, tech, finance, social work, academe support services–as SJW precisely because it’s all they got, and they plan to oppose the actual building of actual things. Since they can’t build them, they can hold hostage those who can/do.

    This really is a war between competent Americans and speculation-based parasites.

  122. @Jack D
    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution. And of course Jesus said that it's easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.

    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution.

    Eh, they were only so, so on the concept. Renters couldn’t vote in almost every colony at the time and nothing changed at founding.

    The best reading of the US Founding is understanding that white Protestant English country aristocrats and middle class were used to governing themselves and wish to continue. Enlightenment ideals were used to justify the break, because theoretically, they owed some allegiance to the Crown by most of their own value system.

    And of course Jesus said that it’s easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.

    Please, for the love of God you don’t believe in, drop the drive by Christian interpretation. It’s bad enough in actual Christians but we’ve got skin in the game. Committed atheists rarely get it right.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Please, for the love of God you don’t believe in, drop the drive by Christian interpretation. It’s bad enough in actual Christians but we’ve got skin in the game. Committed atheists rarely get it right.
     
    A stopped clock...
    , @Jack D
    Did I give the quote incorrectly? The Bible (the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, etc.) represent the accumulated wisdom of all mankind and don't just belong to religious believers of those respective religions. The copyright ran out long ago.
  123. @Faraday's Bobcat
    The culture war is a material part of any ambitious corporation's plans. I'll give you an example that explains why.

    In the old days, Dad was the guy who said, "We're not going to Disneyland this year. We need to put the money toward Junior's college fund." Traditional notions of family gave Dad the juice he needed to take a stand like this.

    So corporations had to destroy Dad. Now, he probably isn't even on the scene, but if he is, he has to pander to everyone, because if Mom doesn't like it she can just walk out the door and take the kids and the money. And the kids have been emboldened by media portrayals to stand up to Dad and undermine him if they don't get what they want. Plus, Junior can borrow money from Uncle Sam to go to college. No Dad needed.

    So everyone goes to Disneyland every year now. What corporation wouldn't like that?

    Back then lots of parents didn’t have a college fund for Junior. They figured if he wanted to go he could afford it himself.

    And he could have.

  124. Fact: Jamie Dimon’s daughter LOVED Luol Deng.

  125. @StillCARealist
    interesting. why would they do this unless they thought it would ultimately help their companies? Maybe in the long run it's more helpful than spending it in other ways. Enlighten us.

    It’s helpful in boosting the stock price in the short term, which is exactly what the executives want, so they can cash out their options and leave. Long term future be damned.

  126. @Cagey Beast
    You are exactly right but, unfortunately, I live in a country that's given up on being its own country. We just wait for things to be decided in the USA and then act as though things have always been that way and could never be otherwise, except perhaps more so. Justin Trudeau and the openly gay, half Indian Prime Minister of Ireland will be dancing their little hearts out at Montreal's gay pride parade today. Whatever the American madhouse comes up with, we institutionalize. We institutionalize the decisions of people who should be institutionalized.

    I live in a country that’s given up on being its own country.

    Not really.

    We’ve got too many people with the power to do something about it who are too busy running an empire to notice, and too many other people who think they’d be better off in the Cosmopol* than as American citizens. That’s not the whole country though, or even a majority.

    * – aka ruled by the Davoisie, postnational

  127. @AM

    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution.
     
    Eh, they were only so, so on the concept. Renters couldn't vote in almost every colony at the time and nothing changed at founding.

    The best reading of the US Founding is understanding that white Protestant English country aristocrats and middle class were used to governing themselves and wish to continue. Enlightenment ideals were used to justify the break, because theoretically, they owed some allegiance to the Crown by most of their own value system.


    And of course Jesus said that it’s easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.
     
    Please, for the love of God you don't believe in, drop the drive by Christian interpretation. It's bad enough in actual Christians but we've got skin in the game. Committed atheists rarely get it right.

    Please, for the love of God you don’t believe in, drop the drive by Christian interpretation. It’s bad enough in actual Christians but we’ve got skin in the game. Committed atheists rarely get it right.

    A stopped clock…

  128. @AM

    The idea that the rich were not better than the rest of us goes back, in the US, at least to the debates surrounding the enactment of the Constitution.
     
    Eh, they were only so, so on the concept. Renters couldn't vote in almost every colony at the time and nothing changed at founding.

    The best reading of the US Founding is understanding that white Protestant English country aristocrats and middle class were used to governing themselves and wish to continue. Enlightenment ideals were used to justify the break, because theoretically, they owed some allegiance to the Crown by most of their own value system.


    And of course Jesus said that it’s easier for a camel to jump through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.
     
    Please, for the love of God you don't believe in, drop the drive by Christian interpretation. It's bad enough in actual Christians but we've got skin in the game. Committed atheists rarely get it right.

    Did I give the quote incorrectly? The Bible (the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, etc.) represent the accumulated wisdom of all mankind and don’t just belong to religious believers of those respective religions. The copyright ran out long ago.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    There never was a copyright, but scriptures are intended to be interpreted by the faithful. They don't perform their intended function without that faith. Likewise prooftexting without a consideration of the surrounding context is likely to lead one astray.
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    Wrong and ridiculous. The Bible represents one part of God's self-revelation to mankind. It is the exclusive property of the Church and requires the active presence of the Holy Ghost to hear and interpret correctly.
  129. @Jack D
    Did I give the quote incorrectly? The Bible (the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, etc.) represent the accumulated wisdom of all mankind and don't just belong to religious believers of those respective religions. The copyright ran out long ago.

    There never was a copyright, but scriptures are intended to be interpreted by the faithful. They don’t perform their intended function without that faith. Likewise prooftexting without a consideration of the surrounding context is likely to lead one astray.

  130. @Jack D
    Did I give the quote incorrectly? The Bible (the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, etc.) represent the accumulated wisdom of all mankind and don't just belong to religious believers of those respective religions. The copyright ran out long ago.

    Wrong and ridiculous. The Bible represents one part of God’s self-revelation to mankind. It is the exclusive property of the Church and requires the active presence of the Holy Ghost to hear and interpret correctly.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    ....and which church would that be?
  131. @Peripatetic commenter
    It seems that the Chinese are laughing at us now:

    https://files.gab.ai/image/599a0d2099f55.jpeg

    Yes, I am a USA citizen who currently lives in China.

    That joke hit home because it reflects trends here in China I am seeing.

    Increasingly, there are articles in newspapers and on the Chinese internet talking about the Cultural Revolution in the USA. Their level of understanding is often pretty nuanced, and sometimes I even wonder if the Chinese authors read Steve’s blog… LOL (or perhaps some other Conservative writers like Coulter, Steyn, etc…) Pretty sure at least some of them do.

    In these Chinese articles often White leftists are mocked, and there is a special Chinese word used to describe them (similar to a Chinese version of a combination of the English terms ” SWPL”and “SJW”).

    On the other hand, I have not read any articles supporting ANTIFA and BLM (though there may be…so I welcome some Chinese commentators who know their culture better than I do to set the record straight if what I am saying is too one sided ). I suspect one reason could be that the Chinese associate ANTIFA, BLM, and the SJW left in the USA with affirmative action which the Chinese feel is unfair and keep some of them and their cousins in the USA out of the best USA schools. On the other hand some young Chinese do love basketball and black music and sports heroes so this could change at least regarding BLM.

    What I do know is that virtually everybody in China, including even the Chinese Communist party,openly admits that the Chinese Cultural Revolution was categorically a huge mistake for China which killed and harmed many innocent people and set back China many years.

    Many Chinese are simply amazed (and not in a good way) at what they see in the USA when they see ANTFA violently acting like the Red guard circa 1960s and trying to enforce SJW ideological orthodoxy.

    I suspect this trend (if it continues and does not die out) is going to be a huge public relations disaster for the image of the USA in China (any maybe elsewhere as well).

    I wonder of the unintended consequences of this cultural revolution in the USA is a PR disaster in the making for the USA and its corporations (ironic given its recent endorsements by CEOs of major corporations) at least among the Chinese. Why? The USA is no longer a “cool” place where freedom reigns , and the USA is making the same mistakes that the Chinese just learned from!. Instead of being a country filled with people they admire, they now realize that the USA is filled with selfish idiots just as dumb, foolish, and easily mislead( who ignorantly mouth moral platitudes and harm others) as the Chinese Red Guard youth of sixty years ago.

    I expect in the near future fewer Apple phones and other products will be sold in China as the “coolness” of the USA brand suffers.

    I also wonder if the current trend continues if there will also be a reduction in future Chinese college students attending schools in the USA . Most Chinese parents who lived through the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution in China want their kids in a safe place not a place that is unstable and has riots courtesy of a USA version of the Red Guard (ANTIFA). This could be a problem for some universities because Chinese students are a considerable revenue source for many America schools since the students often pay full tuition.

    The Chinese are very safety conscious and for the same reason have started to avoid Paris and London as vacation destinations because of safety concerns after all the Muslim terrorist incidents (according to anecdotal evidence and several articles I have read).

    Your country’s brand is very import. Overall ANTIFA and the riots at the schools are a symptom of decline in the USA. Safe, prosperous places don’t have disruptive riots like these at institutions of higher learning. People do not admire, respect, or buy the products of losers or those who are in decline.

    As others have pointed out numerous times, this will not end well.

    Six months ago, I told a friend of mine who was visiting from the USA (and who is a strong Trump supporter) that I was worried that there would be more deaths as a result of the hateful rhetoric of BLM and ANTIFA. They laughed and said I was too worried. Frankly, the recent events have have made me even more worried. I wonder when the fever break?

    I even wonder if the military will have to step in at some point. Perhaps that is why Trump has surrounded his administration with retired military officers?

    I know I am the type that worries a lot, but the situation just seems to be getting worse and worse.

    I wonder if any Chinese commenters might have a different take on the situation. Even though I live here, I am still an outsider and foreigner and so I am sure I am missing some things.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    This could be a problem for some universities because Chinese students are a considerable revenue source for many America schools since the students often pay full tuition.
     
    That free money is what is fueling a good bit of our present devolution. Not unlike the effect of those galleons full of New World gold on renaissance Spain.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Good to hear a boots-on-the-ground, in-country report from you, Seneca. I have seen how full the universities and even some Catholic high schools are with the Chinese students. I get along pretty well with the Chinese, but still, enough is enough, and I agree with Desiderius' reply.

    About the Cultural Revolution, what's sad for us Americans is that even 10 years back, when I read 5 or more books on this senselessly-stupid part of Chinese history, I thought: How could those people be that silly and stupid? Some of the people here are stupid, but not THAT stupid. I was wrong, OK, I'll admit it right now. I think our cultural revolution is somewhat different though, in that the Chinese one was top-down organized, while here, I think the idiots have just come out of the woodwork at local levels. The idiots at the top levels we will always have with us.
  132. @Peripatetic commenter
    It seems that the Chinese are laughing at us now:

    https://files.gab.ai/image/599a0d2099f55.jpeg

    Thanks.

  133. @Intelligent Dasein
    Wrong and ridiculous. The Bible represents one part of God's self-revelation to mankind. It is the exclusive property of the Church and requires the active presence of the Holy Ghost to hear and interpret correctly.

    ….and which church would that be?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    The Body of Christ.

    Not a sectarian issue.
  134. @Seneca
    Yes, I am a USA citizen who currently lives in China.

    That joke hit home because it reflects trends here in China I am seeing.

    Increasingly, there are articles in newspapers and on the Chinese internet talking about the Cultural Revolution in the USA. Their level of understanding is often pretty nuanced, and sometimes I even wonder if the Chinese authors read Steve's blog... LOL (or perhaps some other Conservative writers like Coulter, Steyn, etc...) Pretty sure at least some of them do.

    In these Chinese articles often White leftists are mocked, and there is a special Chinese word used to describe them (similar to a Chinese version of a combination of the English terms " SWPL"and "SJW").

    On the other hand, I have not read any articles supporting ANTIFA and BLM (though there may be...so I welcome some Chinese commentators who know their culture better than I do to set the record straight if what I am saying is too one sided ). I suspect one reason could be that the Chinese associate ANTIFA, BLM, and the SJW left in the USA with affirmative action which the Chinese feel is unfair and keep some of them and their cousins in the USA out of the best USA schools. On the other hand some young Chinese do love basketball and black music and sports heroes so this could change at least regarding BLM.

    What I do know is that virtually everybody in China, including even the Chinese Communist party,openly admits that the Chinese Cultural Revolution was categorically a huge mistake for China which killed and harmed many innocent people and set back China many years.

    Many Chinese are simply amazed (and not in a good way) at what they see in the USA when they see ANTFA violently acting like the Red guard circa 1960s and trying to enforce SJW ideological orthodoxy.

    I suspect this trend (if it continues and does not die out) is going to be a huge public relations disaster for the image of the USA in China (any maybe elsewhere as well).

    I wonder of the unintended consequences of this cultural revolution in the USA is a PR disaster in the making for the USA and its corporations (ironic given its recent endorsements by CEOs of major corporations) at least among the Chinese. Why? The USA is no longer a "cool" place where freedom reigns , and the USA is making the same mistakes that the Chinese just learned from!. Instead of being a country filled with people they admire, they now realize that the USA is filled with selfish idiots just as dumb, foolish, and easily mislead( who ignorantly mouth moral platitudes and harm others) as the Chinese Red Guard youth of sixty years ago.

    I expect in the near future fewer Apple phones and other products will be sold in China as the "coolness" of the USA brand suffers.

    I also wonder if the current trend continues if there will also be a reduction in future Chinese college students attending schools in the USA . Most Chinese parents who lived through the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution in China want their kids in a safe place not a place that is unstable and has riots courtesy of a USA version of the Red Guard (ANTIFA). This could be a problem for some universities because Chinese students are a considerable revenue source for many America schools since the students often pay full tuition.

    The Chinese are very safety conscious and for the same reason have started to avoid Paris and London as vacation destinations because of safety concerns after all the Muslim terrorist incidents (according to anecdotal evidence and several articles I have read).

    Your country's brand is very import. Overall ANTIFA and the riots at the schools are a symptom of decline in the USA. Safe, prosperous places don't have disruptive riots like these at institutions of higher learning. People do not admire, respect, or buy the products of losers or those who are in decline.

    As others have pointed out numerous times, this will not end well.

    Six months ago, I told a friend of mine who was visiting from the USA (and who is a strong Trump supporter) that I was worried that there would be more deaths as a result of the hateful rhetoric of BLM and ANTIFA. They laughed and said I was too worried. Frankly, the recent events have have made me even more worried. I wonder when the fever break?

    I even wonder if the military will have to step in at some point. Perhaps that is why Trump has surrounded his administration with retired military officers?

    I know I am the type that worries a lot, but the situation just seems to be getting worse and worse.

    I wonder if any Chinese commenters might have a different take on the situation. Even though I live here, I am still an outsider and foreigner and so I am sure I am missing some things.

    This could be a problem for some universities because Chinese students are a considerable revenue source for many America schools since the students often pay full tuition.

    That free money is what is fueling a good bit of our present devolution. Not unlike the effect of those galleons full of New World gold on renaissance Spain.

  135. @Anonymous
    ....and which church would that be?

    The Body of Christ.

    Not a sectarian issue.

  136. @Anonymous
    https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/17/16162226/corporations-replacing-churches-americas-conscience

    Are corporations becoming the new arbiters of public morality?

    ... what’s remarkable is not the decision of an individual company — Airbnb, say, or Google — to make a principled and visible choice to ally its personal brand with a given set of values, but rather the prevailing winds of cultural change. The remarkable thing here is the overall climate that makes it profitable for them to make it.

    ... Once, a company might have sold sex, or wealth; the opportunity that buying this product would make you into the person you want to be. (Just remember Mad Men’s Don Draper’s famous maxim, “What you call love was invented by guys like me to sell nylons.”) Now, they sell a community-based form of virtue.

    ... But, in practice, the reinforcement the company provides — demanding the spending of money as a ritualistic as well as transactional act, fostering communal interactions with its fans on social media — is less unilateral. It’s not just virtue-signaling, but virtue-creating.
     

    Needless to say, they don't explore the idea that under capitalism a virtue -- like being pro-immigration -- might be boosted because it's good for business.

    Peak Vox. The kiddie shock troops of the Establishment media.

  137. And if you cannot count on these top executives to do the right thing for the nation, who can you count on?

  138. Our world today is getting weirder by the moment.

    Imagine corporate America and hard core leftists essentially agreeing with each other over core principles.

    But they really just agree on the core principle that the historic American nation and its people are repugnant and must be replaced by the Tower of Babel.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Imagine corporate America and hard core leftists essentially agreeing with each other over core principles.
     
    According to Moldbug, we've been there for a century at least.
  139. @Seneca
    Yes, I am a USA citizen who currently lives in China.

    That joke hit home because it reflects trends here in China I am seeing.

    Increasingly, there are articles in newspapers and on the Chinese internet talking about the Cultural Revolution in the USA. Their level of understanding is often pretty nuanced, and sometimes I even wonder if the Chinese authors read Steve's blog... LOL (or perhaps some other Conservative writers like Coulter, Steyn, etc...) Pretty sure at least some of them do.

    In these Chinese articles often White leftists are mocked, and there is a special Chinese word used to describe them (similar to a Chinese version of a combination of the English terms " SWPL"and "SJW").

    On the other hand, I have not read any articles supporting ANTIFA and BLM (though there may be...so I welcome some Chinese commentators who know their culture better than I do to set the record straight if what I am saying is too one sided ). I suspect one reason could be that the Chinese associate ANTIFA, BLM, and the SJW left in the USA with affirmative action which the Chinese feel is unfair and keep some of them and their cousins in the USA out of the best USA schools. On the other hand some young Chinese do love basketball and black music and sports heroes so this could change at least regarding BLM.

    What I do know is that virtually everybody in China, including even the Chinese Communist party,openly admits that the Chinese Cultural Revolution was categorically a huge mistake for China which killed and harmed many innocent people and set back China many years.

    Many Chinese are simply amazed (and not in a good way) at what they see in the USA when they see ANTFA violently acting like the Red guard circa 1960s and trying to enforce SJW ideological orthodoxy.

    I suspect this trend (if it continues and does not die out) is going to be a huge public relations disaster for the image of the USA in China (any maybe elsewhere as well).

    I wonder of the unintended consequences of this cultural revolution in the USA is a PR disaster in the making for the USA and its corporations (ironic given its recent endorsements by CEOs of major corporations) at least among the Chinese. Why? The USA is no longer a "cool" place where freedom reigns , and the USA is making the same mistakes that the Chinese just learned from!. Instead of being a country filled with people they admire, they now realize that the USA is filled with selfish idiots just as dumb, foolish, and easily mislead( who ignorantly mouth moral platitudes and harm others) as the Chinese Red Guard youth of sixty years ago.

    I expect in the near future fewer Apple phones and other products will be sold in China as the "coolness" of the USA brand suffers.

    I also wonder if the current trend continues if there will also be a reduction in future Chinese college students attending schools in the USA . Most Chinese parents who lived through the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution in China want their kids in a safe place not a place that is unstable and has riots courtesy of a USA version of the Red Guard (ANTIFA). This could be a problem for some universities because Chinese students are a considerable revenue source for many America schools since the students often pay full tuition.

    The Chinese are very safety conscious and for the same reason have started to avoid Paris and London as vacation destinations because of safety concerns after all the Muslim terrorist incidents (according to anecdotal evidence and several articles I have read).

    Your country's brand is very import. Overall ANTIFA and the riots at the schools are a symptom of decline in the USA. Safe, prosperous places don't have disruptive riots like these at institutions of higher learning. People do not admire, respect, or buy the products of losers or those who are in decline.

    As others have pointed out numerous times, this will not end well.

    Six months ago, I told a friend of mine who was visiting from the USA (and who is a strong Trump supporter) that I was worried that there would be more deaths as a result of the hateful rhetoric of BLM and ANTIFA. They laughed and said I was too worried. Frankly, the recent events have have made me even more worried. I wonder when the fever break?

    I even wonder if the military will have to step in at some point. Perhaps that is why Trump has surrounded his administration with retired military officers?

    I know I am the type that worries a lot, but the situation just seems to be getting worse and worse.

    I wonder if any Chinese commenters might have a different take on the situation. Even though I live here, I am still an outsider and foreigner and so I am sure I am missing some things.

    Good to hear a boots-on-the-ground, in-country report from you, Seneca. I have seen how full the universities and even some Catholic high schools are with the Chinese students. I get along pretty well with the Chinese, but still, enough is enough, and I agree with Desiderius’ reply.

    About the Cultural Revolution, what’s sad for us Americans is that even 10 years back, when I read 5 or more books on this senselessly-stupid part of Chinese history, I thought: How could those people be that silly and stupid? Some of the people here are stupid, but not THAT stupid. I was wrong, OK, I’ll admit it right now. I think our cultural revolution is somewhat different though, in that the Chinese one was top-down organized, while here, I think the idiots have just come out of the woodwork at local levels. The idiots at the top levels we will always have with us.

  140. @lavoisier
    Our world today is getting weirder by the moment.

    Imagine corporate America and hard core leftists essentially agreeing with each other over core principles.

    But they really just agree on the core principle that the historic American nation and its people are repugnant and must be replaced by the Tower of Babel.

    Imagine corporate America and hard core leftists essentially agreeing with each other over core principles.

    According to Moldbug, we’ve been there for a century at least.

  141. @Achmed E. Newman
    Repeat comment, take II:

    I hate to break it to you, but your whole country is insane, completely and utterly nuts.
     
    Just as the Soviet Union did ≠ the Russians, the warmongering, PC-Police-State US Feral Government ≠ the Americans. Is that too hard to understand for you?

    OTOH, the way people write even on this board, some seem to want MORE Feral Gov’t, and think that it’ll all be fine, so long as it’s THEIR more Feral Gov’t (like a battered husband, say a Bill Clinton, they’ve got bite marks on their arms, pieces of Whitehouse china lodged in their skulls, bacterial infections from deep scratches in the scrotal area, yet still they come back for more … even support their wives for Senatorial and Presidential positions.) There are shelters for you kinds of people, you know that, right!!?

    Your country is no longer a beacon on a hill. It is corrupt and unwholesome.
     
    I can’t really argue with that. Where do you live, 22pp22? If it were anywhere about which you could say better stuff, I’d have probably moved there already.

    Cyprus.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    22pp22, thanks for the reply. I'll do some reading.
  142. @22pp22
    Cyprus.

    22pp22, thanks for the reply. I’ll do some reading.

  143. For generations, women have been perfecting trans-age-ism. Makeup, hair-dye, workouts, support bras, all are there to fool you, to make a woman look young and fertile when she’s not. This stealthy deception needs to be brought out in the open, because it enables the transgender delusion; if granny can disguise herself as a sexy woman, then so can uncle.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2