RSS
From the New York Times:
Elizabeth Warren, Speaking to Black Graduates, Warns ‘the Rules Are Rigged’
‘It’s Time to Change the Rules,’ Warren Tells Graduates in Speech on Racism
Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts and a possible contender for the 2020 presidential race, spoke to graduates of Morgan State University, a historically black college in Baltimore, about racial discrimination and wealth inequality.
By Astead W. Herndon
Dec. 14, 2018… “Two sets of rules: one for the wealthy and the well-connected. And one for everybody else,” she said. “Two sets of rules: one for white families. And one for everybody else. That’s how a rigged system works. And that’s what we need to change.”
So “white families” are the privileged enemy?
Got it.
This is an interesting question: Is Senator Warren just being an inept yokel again, or is attacking “white families” now smart politics given the demographics of the Democratic primaries and the current media crusade against whiteness and Beckys?
Said the white woman with at best 1/64th native American DNA who claimed minority status to further her career at Harvard.
I’m not sure it’s a smart move for anyone hoping to win a general election. Three quarters of the voters are white. It’s gonna be a while still before anyone can alienate the white vote and still capture the presidency.
In any event, there is no way Trump can win in 2020 absent some major moves on his part, which I no longer think he's going to make. Whoever wins the Dem primary has the Presidency locked up.
my guess is they think if they (media/dems/gope) can prevent Trump from delivering on immigration then his vote will be depressed and even a poor candidate can win.
Cherokees can say what they damn well like, paleface.
Well, obviously, the Great White Squaw can’t say “there’s one set for rules for Jewish families, and one for everyone else,” can she?
God, how badly do you have to want power to say crap like that? Actually, correction: How badly do you have to want to be a puppet for the really powerful to say crap like that?
Well, what ever she says, it’s not going to be a reference to any kind of statistics.
Predator Cities. That’s a good description of globalism.
https://www.thewrap.com/mortal-engines-bomb-2018-box-office/
>>This is an interesting question: Is Senator Warren 1) just being an inept yokel again, or 2) is attacking “white families” now smart politics given the demographics of the Democratic primaries and the current media crusade against whiteness and Beckys?
She can’t walk back this whole faux-ahontas bullshit, so I say number 2. It’s a long shot, but if it pays off, well….
Demagogues gotta demagogue. Still won’t help her presidential hopes, with the lovely and duskier-hued Kamala also in the hunt.
She speak with forked tongue.
- Magua
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LcpgKK2DI4&frags=pl%2Cwn
When was the last time a Democrat suffered any negative consequences from saying/doing something anti-white. Hell, when was the last time a Republican did?
Still you’re probably right, this type of talk will not be a hard barrier for most Dems.
She expects them to see her as non-white and/or on their side as an enemy of the other whites.
This stupidity affects white Socialists again and again. As in South Africa they think they can whip up race hatred, yet never be targeted themselves.
Warren may have a point here. Take Affirmative Action, for example. It’s existence allows whites to keep blacks down with the psychological ravages of Stereotype Threats.
Good thing she’s a Injun. So she personally will do just fine when the rigged system is changed.
“Rigged in favour of white families….”
What about George Zimmerman?
Undoubtedly, Warren understands what needs to be done in order to win over the Black Party but couldn’t she be a bit more subtle than that.
Plus, she left out the Miscellaneous!
Oh, yeah I forgot,”In general, though, the miscellaneous don”t much interest white people. (And blacks pay them almost no attention whatsoever.)” (Sailer, 2013)
Compared to St. Skittles, though, he was "white enough."
Excellent
Bernie lost because he failed to win black voters (other than in his surprise Michigan primary win).
2020 Iowa and NH will be less important because with so many candidates, SC will also need to winnow down the pack. California is only 6% black, but very Hispanic/Asian, and will start mail voting before NH and SC. Possibly before Iowa.
Bernie lost blacks in Michigan, too. His win was from downscale whites, same as most other places.
2020 Iowa and NH will be less important because with so many candidates
Will be critical to Bernie, and very important to Biden, Beto, and Warren (at least NH for her).
SC will also need to winnow down the pack
At the moment, and we are a long way off here, Kamala or Biden (Obama nostalgia) would seem to be the best bets for which way the SC blacks will go.
California is only 6% black, but very Hispanic/Asian
Kamala should dominate Cali thru name ID alone. If she doesn't, she's finished.
The Democratic nominee will be the one,”Blaming Whitey” the loudest and the longest during the primaries.
Implicit/subtle anti-whiteness used to be enough, but now the democrat base and media demands that the anti-white rhetoric be raw, uncut and explicit.
Be nice if someone would ask Warren, just exactly how the rules are different for white families. I always hear about my white privileges, but never how to use/take advantage of them.
You sound like a thirsty fish to me. So immersed in water, you imagine you feel dry.
All meant sarcastically, of course.
OT: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3442256
So peaceful!
Truly something to behold.
It's also interesting that the Chinese govt is basically practicing an explicitly racialist breeding policy.
I wonder if one day, far right Euro govts will force Muslim migrants to marry their women to White Christian males. That'd be something to see.
Warren is quite the disgusting race-baiter, isn’t she? It would be nice if Trump could use this against her if she runs, playing it up at his rallies. However, the media have successfully prevented Trump from mentioning Whites as a separate group by repeatedly asserting that he is a racist and so I don’t think he won’t be able to use it. At least directly, on the stump, where it would have the most impact.
In a big way, the success of Warren’s call for the take-down of White families depends on how much higher on the mountain of self-hatred White families can climb. The mountain at this point is getting pretty steep and it seems to me that, for many Whites, fatigue is setting in. One would think that, by this time, 99% of Whites would be yearning for level ground for themselves and, most importantly, their children.
From that last quote, it sounds like there’s a third option: that she’s putting out two sometimes overlapping false options (the rich, the white), and she’ll flip flop depending on the audience. So non or anti whites, including well off blacks and minorities, will hear what they want to hear, mostly. And poors, including whites, will hear what they want to hear.
2020 Iowa and NH will be less important because with so many candidates, SC will also need to winnow down the pack. California is only 6% black, but very Hispanic/Asian, and will start mail voting before NH and SC. Possibly before Iowa.
Bernie lost because he failed to win black voters (other than in his surprise Michigan primary win)
Bernie lost blacks in Michigan, too. His win was from downscale whites, same as most other places.
2020 Iowa and NH will be less important because with so many candidates
Will be critical to Bernie, and very important to Biden, Beto, and Warren (at least NH for her).
SC will also need to winnow down the pack
At the moment, and we are a long way off here, Kamala or Biden (Obama nostalgia) would seem to be the best bets for which way the SC blacks will go.
California is only 6% black, but very Hispanic/Asian
Kamala should dominate Cali thru name ID alone. If she doesn’t, she’s finished.
I have a dream of starting a political party called the Family Formation Party. It will be focused on basically a Trumpist agenda but will also have generous tax incentives for people living in a traditional family structure. Obviously, “families” organized around a same sex “marriage” will not qualify. But this won’t be based on race. No matter who you are, if you are an adult and live with a spouse and kids, the state will for example give you a down payment on a house. Healthcare credits, etc. That kind of thing. But these incentives won’t go to single parents either. It’s a total reimagining of the welfare system to incentivize family formation. All this could be easily financed by halving the defense budget which we all know is a scam and a joke as structured currently.
It’s a pipe dream, sure. But it’s nice to dream.
Also, much larger, and “NONrefundable” federal income tax credits for people with children, would help.
Whites and Asians are disproportionately represented among the roughly fifty percent of US residents who actually pay net fed income tax — not counting FICA’s 6.5% for employee share of Social Security and 1.45% for Medicare. This suggests that whites and Asians would benefit substantially more (and be more incentivized to have more children) than other races, in the aggregate. That’s probably the best facially race-neutral measure one can hope for at the moment.
https://www.berkeleyside.com/2018/12/11/with-a-new-crop-of-asian-american-officials-berkeley-sets-a-new-record
Berkeley is about to improve. Four Asian (Han) on their city council. I suspect that like the anti-homeless initiative in Orange County they have had enough.
Jenny Wong is merely the city auditor, which is not unlike John Chiang, Betty Yee, etc. at state level. That had long been an Asian-American niche for the record keeping/accounting positions all the way back to March Fong Eu in California.
James Chang is on the rent stabilization board, and being Taiwanese-American, may count as Pacific Island rather than full-blood Han.
Nicky González Yuen, is on the board of local community college. And based on his name/look, is Filipino Chinese without small amount of Han heritage at this point.
Would she care to elaborate on those white privileges? Things have been rough for a while here and I would like to take advantage of a few of them.
Very smart move sadly by Warren. The move by educated Whites to hard left anti White politics is driven by the hate hate hate if White women for beta males. That woman in the BUT wanting a sperm donor bc her hubby was not hot enough or the having her hubby build acuckshed is the picture of modern marriage among educated Whites.
The last time I looked, I believe Senator Warren is White. She be bat-sh*t crazy. Umgawa!
Isn’t that really 4 sets of rules? Math is hard.
“Tu parle poison avec deux langues!”
– Magua
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LcpgKK2DI4&frags=pl%2Cwn
She’s right but in a way that is directly opposite of what she means.
What the hell is she talking about? No institutions interact with white families. I’ve never heard of rules for families of any race. And the notion that there are any rules anywhere that favor white people (or white “families”) is batshit crazy.
In a sense, a white marriage is a conspiracy against the US Government. It hurts USG's numbers because it increases inequality. It hurts USG's feelings because even liberal white marrieds engage in white flight (looking for a 'great school district' and a 'good house in a great neighborhood') or gentrification.
The solution for USG is to continue to expand the child support regime at the expense of the marriage conspiracy.
h/t Dalrock
US Senator Lizzie Borden Warren has taken a rhetorical ax to White families in the United States to secure Black votes in the upcoming Democrat Party presidential primary election.
Lizzie Borden had prominent cheekbones and so does US Senator Lizzie Borden Warren. US Senator Warren fraudulently featured her cheekbones as proof that she was an Amerindian by blood to advance her career using the race quota racket.
Lizzie Borden Warren is so damn vain about her cheekbones that she figured she could get some frigging money-making mileage out of her God-given face bones by claiming to be an Amerindian in need of special privileges because of her so-called “diversity” status.
It is a damn outrage!
Billionaire bastards are bashing the Hell out of everybody, regardless of race or ancestry, and this baby boomer sonofabitch Lizzie Borden Warren decides to pick up her rhetorical ax and start chopping up White families?
ATTENTION US SENATOR LIZZIE BORDEN WARREN: GO TO HELL!
I actually want anti-white hatred to get ever stronger and ever more unhinged. The more openly they hate whites, the less they can pretend when debating us that they are only for “fairness” or “equality” or whatever bullshit.
Because then people will suddenly see? A giant hulking dude can claim to be a woman, engage in sports where he gets to beat the living crap out of actual women, and they do not see. Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome, and they do not see. Inner cities across America have declined and they do not see.
I submit that hoping things get really ridiculous or bad so that the people will see is a bad strategy.
A political genius whose name escapes my immediate memory put a name to Hillary Clinton’s use of Black Lady voters to bash the Hell out of Bernie Sanders.
It is called the AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY and it provided Hillary Clinton her means of stopping Bernie Sanders after the Bernie Brothers and other White Democrat Party dodo heads signalled their displeasure with the Clinton Organized Crime Syndicate by proudly supporting Bernie Sanders.
I claim the creation of the GERMAN STRATEGY name for getting the German American vote in the Great Lakes states, but I’ll have to do some internet research to figure out who came up with the very memorable name AUNT JEMIMA STRATEGY to describe Hillary Clinton’s use of Black Lady voters to defeat Bernie Sanders.
Tweet from 2015:
There is also a change here: the inclusion of white women into her orgy of hatred. Good to know.
I suppose white/black mixed families don’t count as white, so no hate there; but someone should have stood up and asked E. Warren. Asked for a friend, of course.
Did she explain how and when legal separate but equal came back into effect? I certainly didn’t notice that the last time I paid my taxes, applied for my tax ID, got my license or anything of the sort.
But then again, I have noticed that I, as a black person, can say shit that gets white people fired, de-platformed and financially ruined.
PS: Ron, can I get out the Moderation Box so my comments don’t show up hours after I’ve posted, please?
Not only is Leftist talk about “families” crazy, Ben, but it’s an outright falsehood to assert that the Left cares about them in any way. “The family is the problem” has been the motto of every radical societal vision since Plato’s Republic. The modern Left has been pretty successful at redefining the family out of existence. Ask Warren to clarify what she means by “family” and she’d probably refuse.
Child support is the institutional substitute for white families. Neolibs and, surprisingly, social conservatives, seek to expand the government at the expense of the family.
In a sense, a white marriage is a conspiracy against the US Government. It hurts USG’s numbers because it increases inequality. It hurts USG’s feelings because even liberal white marrieds engage in white flight (looking for a ‘great school district’ and a ‘good house in a great neighborhood’) or gentrification.
The solution for USG is to continue to expand the child support regime at the expense of the marriage conspiracy.
h/t Dalrock
One white manager two of whose kids worked for us as teens told us that those two have produced 16 of his 19 grandchildren in the meantime. Unfortunately, it appears the one with 12 is heading for divorce. Pray for them-- let's not strengthen the hand of the feds.
Good one.
http://imfwp.law.stanford.edu/
Is Marriage for White People?
Sen. Warren accurately points out that Whites increase inequality through their capital accumulation, marriages and aversion to making financial transfers outside of the direct descendant-ancestor line. (With an exception for a sibling that has cancer).
The top-tier "foundation left" and some of their academic outposts have already figured out that all their forms of taxation are, in effect, genetic taxes.
Example: Liz didn't have to pay for the genes she took from Jim Warren--the turbogeek engineer and mathematician and a founder of FT DNA--to produce her offspring. She took those offspring/genes to another family unit/man/household absolutely for free, just as I presume she took at least some years of support for those offspring from him while they were still married.
But she will insist that you pay 60% tax or whatever on anything you work for and accumulate and preserve that you want to pass down in YOUR family when you croak.
The (((bolshie))) left has always been about disrupting all forms of White people's genetic strategies, expressed as family formation and wealth transfer.
When you start to unpack "progressive" tax regimes it's quite astonishing how utterly grounded they are in genomic warfare and theft. The whole point of the open borders welfare state is to cripple Whites' ability to have children and pass down wealth to them.
It all comes back to GeneWar.
One quibble: Whites don't increase inequality. "Increase inequality" is a euphemism for "strengthen their own population."
We are supposed to like being yoked to destroying our own people/offspring and ancestral legacies, while handing it all over to strengthen OTHERS' populations. That is equal, fair, and just, they say. WE are the thieves...for having had ancestors who strengthened and preserved their genomic capacities and ability to function as a group.
I have this argument a lot with Christians of my acquaintance. The ones who spend X months a year in OogaBoogaLand, handing out First World medical services or infrastructure. Never mind that people closely genetically related to them right here in the US lack or need those services. Their "religions" are literally formulas for destruction and theft of their own genetic pool. And many of these folks are ranchers and other livestock owners who would never think of doing this with, say, their cattle, sheep, or goats.
The way to start accumulating wealth is very simple. Consume less than you earn. This means, driving a crappier car than you can afford, taking crappier vacations than you can afford, taking care of what you have instead of buying new things, and then investing the difference. Also, avoid buying services such as plumbers, painters, and so forth when you can do the job yourself. Again, invest the difference. Work overtime or work a second job even when you aren’t broke and invest the difference.
The average Chinese person earns a lot less than a black American and yet has a lot more wealth.
Oh, well. The left will ensure that the Trump era is the peak of American history because they will follow it with certain decline.
There are two factors that correlate strongly with national wealth above all others: Capitalism and national IQ. The left seems to want to wreak both at the same time. If they succeed, we will see a decline on rocket fuel.
The most cutting tweets ever will be the tweets where Trump, in his old age, mocks the American decline that comes after.
“I actually want anti-white hatred to get ever stronger and ever more unhinged.”
Because then people will suddenly see? A giant hulking dude can claim to be a woman, engage in sports where he gets to beat the living crap out of actual women, and they do not see. Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome, and they do not see. Inner cities across America have declined and they do not see.
I submit that hoping things get really ridiculous or bad so that the people will see is a bad strategy.
but people are social animals - they conform to the current dominant culture until the day they don't.
Right on, however each new generation of socialists operates under the motto of : "They, the Ruskies, the Chinese, Cubans, East Germans, Hungarians, Poles, etc, they were the wrong ones, as they did not understand Marx and we do", so no amount of rational discussion will get through to them as they are insane.
AJM
Is it any wonder antifa are winked at and not-so-tacitly encouraged while “white families” who refuse to publicly flagellate themselves are edging closer and closer (at bayonet-point, of course) to the gulag?
Warren may be a comically-desperate snake-oil huckster, but she has advisers who aren’t. And those advisers are telling her to keep pouring it on white people: it’s the sort of knuckle-dragging Hate nobody will ever extract a price from her for saying out loud. No matter if someone in that audience grows up to be the next Colin Ferguson or Vester Flanagan – the only penalty regarding a breadcrumb trail will await the poor bastard who constructs one after the fact.
What a vile slag.
Nobody has pretended that for a very, very long time. The only people ever to even make such a claim were the stuffy, old, White liberals like Earl Warren and his generation. Nowadays everybody knows that it’s just forced redistribution via a spoils system slash low intensity race war. The only “arguments” being made are that White people deserve to pay up and suffer.
It’s just like the case with abortion. Three decades ago the main arguments of the pro-aborts revolved around the idea that nothing wrong was being done because the unborn baby didn’t meet some technical definition of personhood. “It isn’t human being, it’s just a lump of cells,” was the basic notion in soundbite form. Now nobody even bothers with that pretense. The argument is more like, “Of course it’s a human being, but so what? It’s an inconvenient person living in my body and I can kill him if I feel like it.”
Once you start playing games with right and wrong, once you start allowing exceptions to the natural law, the path from legal niceties to Who?-Whom? is inescapable.
It’s doubtful she’ll be going anywhere as a presidential contender. She was wounded by Trump with his ‘Pocahontas’ quip and her DNA stunt only backfired on her. She knows this and so is now sounding bitter and angry at the population that probably won’t vote for her. Her assertion about white families is nonsense but it’s interesting how she’s hidden her real feelings all these years in order to get whites to vote for her. Looking back on her fraudulent and fanciful stories about her supposed Indian ancestry this woman looks increasingly to be some sort of mental case.
Isn’t this just her response to the anger of the Native American community about her claims of Cherokee cheekbones? You need to engage in White bashing in inverse proportion to how white you are, and her DNA test shows just how much she needs to up her anti-White game.
She needs a radical makeover. I suggest that she needs to divorce her current white liberal hubby in favor of someone a lot blacker. Should she go for an illegal Somalian immigrant who sneaked in through Canada? Or possibly an African American who can prove he’s descended from slaves? And maybe some deep tanning and Doleszal dreads.
Just saying. I’m not a professional political consultant, of course.
You misspelled 'racial.'
She is white and privileged, so all white people must be privileged.
Full text of the speech:
To the extent that she presents evidence it is that redlining was good for Blacks.
“Finally, during the 1960s, redlining was banned. And over the next twenty-five years or so, black families started building more wealth. The black-white wealth gap began to shrink. And that might have been the end of the story.”
“*Black homeownership rates are now lower than they were when housing discrimination was legal. Today, the black-white wealth gap is bigger than it was back in the 1960s. (I can’t figure out the astrict in front of Black, but it is there on her web page, does she have staff issues?)”
Buried later in the speech she implies she just wants to level the playing field even though eliminating redlining did the opposite:
“Pit white working people against black and brown working people so they won’t band together and demand real change.” (After Pres Hopey Changy the D candidates should avoid the words Hope and Change)
In part, the problem might be a lack of both talent and practice at speechifying. At 69 maybe the Jim Crow world of her childhood Norman Oklahoma and explains some of her world view. She arrives in Mass. long after the Great Migration and the race problems and sees a gentrified world, but does not see all the White losers of the Great Migration game as they are long gone and according to E Micheal Jones targeted to be forced out to dilute their voting power. She has no comment on Asians who appear to me to have the same privileges and advantages she claims White people have and are disproportionately going to be the new upper class. She also has to win the Democratic primary.
https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-delivers-commencement-address-at-morgan-state-university
Even though she is an older woman I’m kind of sweet on Sen Warren, this is the younger Sen Warren I choose to think about:
An all-voucher or all-school choice system would be a shock to the educational system, but the shake out might be just what the system needs…But over time, the whole concept of “the Beverly Hills schools” or “Newton schools” would die out, replaced in the hierarchy by schools that offer a variety of programs that parents want for their children, regardless of the geographic boundaries. By selecting where to send their children (and where to spend their vouchers), parents would take control over schools’ tax dollars, making them the de facto owners of those schools.
http://www.aei.org/publication/elizabeth-warren-on-school-choice/
She might make an interesting, that is non-Ivy League, supreme court pick.
Another perfect illustration of Fragile White Women trying to rule the Angry Black Man’s party. It always amuses me. The most privileged attempting to lead the least privileged. This is going to be fun.
Yes, attacking “white privilege” is currently a smart move for someone seeking the Democrat nomination. BUT, the question is, how do you pivot from that to a position that will enable you to carry the general election? Hillary forgot to pivot and we know the result, and she had a lot less distance to pivot than someone like Warren who is already staking out her position far out on the left limb.
The thing that concerns me is that Trump will be so wounded by all of the legal attacks against him by Mueller, the Democrat House, etc. that he (or whoever replaces him on the ballot) will lose to whoever the Democrats put on the ballot no matter how Leftist – in effect Jimmy Carter II.
She needs to take better lessons in pandering and lying.
Poor white families do not have access like “everybody else” to gibsmedat government handouts. For example, black churches are crucial for getting a maximum amount of government handouts to their followers and to spread the word quickly. Obamaphones (which were started under Bush) exploded thanks to black churches getting the word out starting in 2008 after Obama was nominated. And it’s not just for Obamaphones, it’s every handout the Democrats & RINO’s can give to a black underclass (that doesn’t work) through their lawyers & black pastors who make a killing like the infamous Rev. Wright. Similar thing with illegal immigrant benefits – just drive through low income areas where illegals live and you’ll see illegal immigration lawyers advertising outside of offices side-by-side with “community activists” that ensure every illegal is signed up for EBT cards, Obamacare, Obamaphone, etc… Though we are still a white majority country (but not much longer), I’ve never seen a widespread network for poor white folks to help them with the bureaucracy and extensive help to correctly fill out forms to obtain all the government gibsmedat that “everybody else” easily obtains. Senator Pocahontas is lying again.
If Warren is betting that the Negro electorate can achieve the same levels of stupidity and gullibility as Harvard Law School faculty selection and tenure committees, she is betting long odds.
I would like to see the Democrats run a transexual candidate in 2020.
That would be the ultimate in pretending to be what you are not.
Is there ever a point where people no longer accept the linguistic ritual of self-abnegation and demand actual performance? The Catholic Church has managed alright.
Once common misconception on unz.com is that the claim of “white privilege” is not real. This is surprising, given the emphasis on human biological differences (HBD).
DoD will not take people with an IQ below 83. Recruiting below IQ 83 was tried during the McNamara era and failed badly. See:
if you can take a _really_ sad story.
Average Black IQ in the United States is, according to generally accepted HBD, about 85, S.D. 12. _That_ implies about 43% of the Black population _cannot do anything economically productive_ in an industrialized society. Given the degree of racial identity among Blacks, accepting the utter inability of half their number to earn a living wage (or any kind of wage except money in exchange for negative value, such as not hurting people during robberies or not destroying property) would be fatal to their ability to continue reproducing. This inability was cited (and presented to the public in films) during the civil rights propaganda campaigns during the 1960s. Integration and the provision of welfare/patronage “jobs” to the lucky 57% destroyed a working Black economy that provided a real basis for Black pride, and gave the illusion that _no_ Black could succeed in a White society.
This is the real White privilege, this and the “intact families” mentioned by Sen. Warren. The essential assertion of the Left, under the HBD interpretation, is that racial groups that have not adapted over several hundred (or perhaps thousand) years are simply _unable_ to live in industrialized societies. Basic Christianity says that this is evil, as all people have equal value in the eyes of God. Rawls says that _any_ difference in outcomes violates the “Original Position” (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/#OriPos) and is thus not “just”. Therefore, the HBD position that some groups are better adopted to industrial society means that (a) industrial society is intrinsically unjust, or that (b) industrial society must be changed to ensure equality of opportunity for any group in its vicinity (in the world, under current interpretations).
Suppose, however, that industrial society doesn’t have the economic surplus to support a large non-participant group, and would transform into another system with even _less_ equality between groups? The possibility seems an important one, since the USSR collapsed from precisely that cause. Rawls gives no answer. Neither do his present day disciples.
We are therefore left with an intrinsically unjust society (under Christianity and Rawls both). This is taken quite seriously by the descendants of the New England Protestants (who were largely responsible for the US Civil War, and apparently are happy to risk another one), by various groups who are severely adapted to industrial society and want continue to exist outside of it, by other groups that wish to dominate the existing industrial society, and by yet other groups that hope to transform US industrial society to that of their ancestral regions.
Well, what did you expect? Western theory says that all humans have original sin, that existence is tragic (“that which I should do and want to do, I do not, and that which I should not do, and do not want to do, that I do.”).
A “liberal person” has historically been a person who gives away his own property to others. A contemporary liberal gives away the property of third parties to others, usually getting the property by a threat of imposing negative value on the third party. Much of that is justified by reference to Rawls and Christianity, but (obviously) without referencing the tragedy of human life. I, personally, have seen most my friends killed, much of my family killed, some friends and relatives driven insane, a technological stagnation except in information systems that has greatly increased the human death rate and poisoning with industrial waste. Do the disciples of Rawles care about that? Who cares about that?
One further comment: I remember back when the US was sold on Civil Rights and on an early version of tolerance. We were told that we were in a life and death struggle with communism, and that we could all die within any given 15 minute interval (that being the flight time for an ICBM from the USSR). Much of that was true — after 1990, it turned out that the USSR believed in saturation bombing, and had allocated some 500 tactical nuclear devices to West Germany alone. Some of it was false — the Russian leadership had seen the Russsian Front during WW II, and didn’t want to see it again (Nicky the K: Q. Did you ever visit the front in Stalingrad? {Horrible scene, bulldozers used to bury fields strewn with frozen body parts.} A. Yes, but I didn’t go back.) The USSR’s leadership didn’t really want to start WW II. They wanted to stay home, hug their knees, and wait until the shuddering went away. At least they had sense, a rare commodity anywhere.
But that’s over. The Cold War ended about 30 years ago, a bit over a generation. President Trump has successfully withdrawn the US from the coalition assembled to fight the Cold War. He had little choice: The US would have very soon gone bankrupt had it continued to bribe other coalition members with pieces of the US economic base. In fact, I suspect that this is the reason that Israel is backing Trump and the US Reformed Judaism establishment (the New York establishment, effectively) isn’t: Israel needs the US long term, NYC establishment doesn’t think long term.
And since the Cold War is over and the US is disengaged (that’s the “damage” the TDS people talk about), there is no longer any reason for the US base population to be nice to anybody. No reason at all.
See Copley, _Uncivilization_.
http://www.artofvictory.com/UnCivilization-Download.htm
The “Rules” are: man marrying woman in a long term or lifelong union, combining incomes and splitting expenses in one household, delaying childbearing until a period of personal and economic stability, and father being present in the household and engaged in child rearing of his biological children.
Of course, this is what we used to mean by “family.”
Moderator:
Please change text “didn’t really want to start WW II” to “didn’t really want to start WW III”. Sorry.
Yeah, white families crammed into trailer parks along tornado alley are wealthy. Honey Boo Boo is the face of white privilege.
Staying married, effectively educating and disciplining your kids is a white thing.
She is a mid December speaker at a black college, and the NYT is still pushing her? Add that to the fact she never faced a real primary in one of the bluest of states.
I think Hillary talks better jive than Warren. Warren’s language often seems almost Freudian in an ultra-feminist way. Crushed – hammered – they are not things you want to say before the wrong audience. Especially when you likely have osteoporosis.
I think these particularly white families will be given a dispensation.
Even though their standard of living is on the higher side of whitedom.
Where is John Wayne when you need him?
Even though their standard of living is on the higher side of whitedom.
A lot of homosexual ””””””families”””””” (at least in those pictures) seem to have black children. Is this just oversupply or is there some specifically homo thing going on?
When a black kid ends up in foster care, it's a sign that the kid's parents are truly, massively evil or inept and stupid to the point where 80 points of IQ looks high. We're talking incredibly bad genes in that family. The kid is going to grow up to be a disaster no matter what the parenting.
Even Madonna has to go to Malawi.
She sounds like a cultural appropriator and a racist.
Bish is on the warpath
If she doesnt bang a black man its all talk.
To me this screams ineptitude. The first two states are still Iowa and NH and to be a front runner you probably gotta finish top 2 in one of them. And these states are very white.
The democratic primary will include actual black people. They will get most black votes. A smart and courageous Democrat would campaign in Iowa and NH on working class populism and attack pandering identity politics.
The linked Root article is beyond ridiculous. Her proposed bill looks like it includes all of the errors that guided us down the path of the housing crash a decade ago.
The pandering is thick in this one.
The Democrats think Trump is so self-evidently awful that anyone who isnt Hillary Clinton will beat him.
As a result, their primary voters aren’t going to be restrained by the issue of “electability.”
So the primary will be a full SJW panderfest the whole way through. The male candidates will be falling all over themselves to prove their anti-male, feminist bona fides. The White candidates will have to prove they hate white people.
And Kamala Harris will win. Demography is destiny, especially if you are a Democrat.
A mass without capable leaders with eventually lose cohesion. The interesting thing about the coalition of the fringes is that the people who put it together and held it together, historically speaking, have been white males. Without their leadership and advice, the coalition will fall apart. Remember how Bill told Hillary not to ignore the rust belt states, and she did and blew it? That's what happens when you ignore white male advice.
- the growing hispanic part of the coalition will see it as their turn (cos Obama)
- the corporate donors will want a puppet
and the corporate Dems have been grooming Castro for that role for a while - he's not very good but then neither is/was Macron but if you're the banker's candidate you get full media backing.
As usual you somewhat overstate the point, but there’s a larger truth here. The manosphere tends to exaggerate, on its face, the extent to which traditional beta tactics have been invalidated by feminism, sexual liberation et al. The conformist tack can actually work very well — in fact it works far better than trying to be a “PUA,” something only a tiny minority can truly pull off. However, the price of this conformity is to be treated like a total doormat, and disposed of at whim. You have no security, no dignity, no respect. Nothing. Yet, they do manage to reproduce, so in that sense they can be said to ‘win.’ There’s a reason why most men are cowards — it works. You only need to swallow any semblance of pride whatsoever.
It is good to attack White families because it incentivizes Whites to intermarry with other groups so as not to have White families.
Are you off your meds?
The other in which wife asks hubby for sperm donor bc hubby ain't all that.
Featured on Ace of Spades, Heartiste. Most educated White women are somewhere on that spectrum. Hence the open alliance with non Whites.
Forget about whether E. Warren exaggerated her Cherokee heritage. The creepy thing about her is that he appears to be embarrassed about being White.
Warren doesn’t like white families because her family is no longer white. Her daughter Amelia Warren Tyagi is married to an East Indian Suhail Tyagi and has dark-skinned East Indian offspring. Her son has a black kid. You can see pictures of her daughter’s family on the net.
She is positioning herself to secure a future for her non-white grandchildren.
Always cherchez la femme/le homme/la famille of a person.
What about George Zimmerman?
Undoubtedly, Warren understands what needs to be done in order to win over the Black Party but couldn't she be a bit more subtle than that.
Plus, she left out the Miscellaneous!
Oh, yeah I forgot,"In general, though, the miscellaneous don”t much interest white people. (And blacks pay them almost no attention whatsoever.)" (Sailer, 2013)
Zimmerman was only “white” because it fit the New York Times narrative to call him white. He was actually half-white — his mother was a Peruvian with a lotta Inca blood.
Compared to St. Skittles, though, he was “white enough.”
I think she is pretty smart actually. She lays it out pretty clearly: White families vs. everyone else – and everyone else includes single White women, stable families of other races, gays etc. I think she perceives, quite correctly, where the core GOP vote is coming from: White families headed by married couples. She has to keep others from emotionally joining that base. She needs her voters to see themselves as not included in that base. I expect you will see more of this, and not less of this.
This attitude and verbiage is to be encouraged by the lunatics of the professional left.
Excerpt from one of Woody Allens 1970-80’s young girlfriends, Christina Engelhardtecent, Hollywood Reporter article.
It's a pipe dream, sure. But it's nice to dream.
In essence, you want free government handouts for people like you, and everyone else can go hang. You make a fine Democrat.
Yes, but being vocally anti-white doesn’t alienate all of the white vote. In fact, it likely gets you about 40% of the white vote right off the bat. And much more importantly, it gets you wealthy Jews and wealthy white people, who are the ones that fund your campaign. It most certainly gets you the billionaire class, the media, Hollywood and academia, all tremendous influencers.
In any event, there is no way Trump can win in 2020 absent some major moves on his part, which I no longer think he’s going to make. Whoever wins the Dem primary has the Presidency locked up.
The average Chinese person earns a lot less than a black American and yet has a lot more wealth.
Oh, well. The left will ensure that the Trump era is the peak of American history because they will follow it with certain decline.
There are two factors that correlate strongly with national wealth above all others: Capitalism and national IQ. The left seems to want to wreak both at the same time. If they succeed, we will see a decline on rocket fuel.
The most cutting tweets ever will be the tweets where Trump, in his old age, mocks the American decline that comes after.
Your points are good, except that Trump will be deplatformed, and the Great Decline started about 55 years ago.
~15K comments on womans DNA test reveal.
Not a chance in the still nearly all white upper midwest, the only states that change anymore. Kamala alone is a disqualifier among whites familiar with the managerial acumen of black women. Lose Wisconsin, Michigan or Pennsylavania and Democrats cannot win.
https://www.thewrap.com/mortal-engines-bomb-2018-box-office/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRsFc2gguEg
Elaborate please.
Because then people will suddenly see? A giant hulking dude can claim to be a woman, engage in sports where he gets to beat the living crap out of actual women, and they do not see. Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome, and they do not see. Inner cities across America have declined and they do not see.
I submit that hoping things get really ridiculous or bad so that the people will see is a bad strategy.
I agree.
It's a pipe dream, sure. But it's nice to dream.
Can’t just give out downpayments without requiring the beneficiaries to work hard, live frugally and responsibly, and save on their own as well. Perhaps match the amount that a striving family saves towards a down payment, fifty-fifty?
Also, much larger, and “NONrefundable” federal income tax credits for people with children, would help.
Whites and Asians are disproportionately represented among the roughly fifty percent of US residents who actually pay net fed income tax — not counting FICA’s 6.5% for employee share of Social Security and 1.45% for Medicare. This suggests that whites and Asians would benefit substantially more (and be more incentivized to have more children) than other races, in the aggregate. That’s probably the best facially race-neutral measure one can hope for at the moment.
Echoes of the “two Americas” stump speech by John Edwards, which was mostly about rich vs poor, jobs vs outsourcing and such. That was before the working man’s party became blatantly anti-white.
Wish someone would ask her to explain about these special rules for white families. In my case, it’s having property tax amount to confiscation of my own retirement and healthcare to pay for that of unionized teachers. It goes for school construction bonds rolled over to remodel restrooms to make them more ‘inclusive’ and pay for better-than-me immigrants to have their kids educated here on my dime.
And generations of whites have wished redlining would have saved their real estate from being devalued, which again amounts to stealing their lifetime’s work. The ghettoes were once good real estate, no? Why, it’s almost like a tax, or a special rule to take the property of white families until the hood was sufficiently run down for HUD, the tax-funded developer of, by, and for blacks. Since that was a corrupt money pit, Obama started sending them into white neighborhoods far and wide to enjoy a better life that none of them knew the value of because none of them built it. (Oh, that’s right: “you didn’t build that.”) I still see them on the 6 o’clock news along with the diversity our state insists on subsidizing. Now we have to build a new jail for them, too.
To add to injury, the anti-whites can’t stop insulting us. I’d rather vote for a dog than a Democrat; at least dogs are loyal.
I think that’s what’s available.
I happen to agree with her that there are two sets of rules, 1 for whites and 1 for everyone else, and that they need to be changed. Just not in the direction she is thinking.
As a white savior speaking to a room full of black people, Senator Warren had a raging mental hard-on going. I’m surprised she made it to the end.
Two separate stories. One in which hubby build shed to sleep in while boyfriend bangs wife.
The other in which wife asks hubby for sperm donor bc hubby ain’t all that.
Featured on Ace of Spades, Heartiste. Most educated White women are somewhere on that spectrum. Hence the open alliance with non Whites.
What is the conformist tack?
I can’t decide if it would be better for us if a leftist Democrat got in next time or whether Trump (or another Republican) were elected. The Republicans are so weak that maybe it would be better to have the Democrats win in order to cleanse the Republican Party in opposition. Unfortunately, the Democrats won’t be afraid of exercising power like Trump appears to be. Harris/Clinton/Warren would have no problem sending the army door to door to confiscate guns.
OT. Long compendium of James Watson quotations. It starts with the JQ and keeps going from there.
http://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2018/05/18/james-watson-in-his-own-words/
Reading this it looks like Watson was Watsoned for more than the one statement about Africans. Having one of the biggest discoveries in all of science gave him quite a bit of insurance that finally ran out.
Some of his comments about Rosa Franklin and Francis Crick are interesting and not in The Double Helix. He says she had Asperger’s and that Crick may also have been on the autistic spectrum.
What makes you think this will alienate White voters. Many of them agree with her perspective?
Whether the GOP is smart enough to take advantage of this remains to be seen. But there will no doubt be Republican presidential candidates after Trump that will attempt to do so.
Never too late to start a race war, eh Senator?
Only two sets of rules?
Judging by what Ivy League universities get up to, there are at least three sets of rules for different ethnic groups (and possibly four, depending on how much credence one gives to Ron Unz’s allegations regarding the overrepresentation of a certain group at Ivy Leagues).
This woman is out of higher education. Per the Digest of Education Statistics, about 14% of the cross-sectionally assessed enrollment in baccalaureate-granting institutions is black, precisely their share of the population. Standardized test scores for blacks are about 0.75 SD lower than they are for the generic youth. The only way your sum of student bodes has that many blacks therein is if you admit any black youth with an equivalency and a pulse beat. (Keep in mind that as we speak, 38% of each youth cohort receive no tertiary schooling and 55% do not receive a baccalaureate degree; even today, college isn’t for everyone). What is it? Is she unaware of a pervasive reality in her own industry or is she lying baldly and without shame?
However, as to your 2nd guess, right there on page 3 (after the table of contents), I found:
"At the end of this lesson, the candidate shall be able to lie baldly and without shame". There, duckduckgo is your friend.
How the heck does a state that is only 6.5% black elect a black US senator? The majority of California is White/Hispanic, yet Kamela Harris would love to destroy both these groups of people. Why the heck did the vote for her? It’s not just the whites in California that are brainwashed to be anti-white, the Hispanics are being brainwashed to be anti-Hispanic as well.
I get a little tired about the use of wealth rather than income in these rants. Or consumption. The poor consume 100% of there income. Does anyone want to talk about earned income credit as a tool for wealth accumulation? Yea its a technicality and picky, but the poor are a lot more equal wrt consumption.
And are white women oppressed or privileged? Warren actually has some decent populist rhetoric lying around, but identity politics pandering won’t help.
2020 is going to be interesting. If whites and males are ousted from the Democrats for not being the proper race or gender, there’s going to be a mass exodus from the party of up-and-coming pols who see the writing on the wall. If these ambitious people want a future, they’ll have to leave the party. They may go 3rd party in a big way and fatally fracture the Democrats.
A mass without capable leaders with eventually lose cohesion. The interesting thing about the coalition of the fringes is that the people who put it together and held it together, historically speaking, have been white males. Without their leadership and advice, the coalition will fall apart. Remember how Bill told Hillary not to ignore the rust belt states, and she did and blew it? That’s what happens when you ignore white male advice.
On the other hand, white men are still perfectly electable as Democrats (for now) on the state and local level. So it's really more of a cap than a barrier. (A "melanin-testosterone ceiling"?).
given how Warren personally figured out and explained how the white middle class was being destroyed by a combination of declining real wages and ever increasing housing costs leading to squeezed disposable income*
these comments are pure evil.
white democrats know they have no chance of being nominated unless they crank up the anti-white venom so that’s what she’s doing – i’m glad it’s not going to help her and she’ll end up hated by everyone instead.
(*stagnant wages = mass immigration + off-shoring aka supply and demand)
(*housing costs = mass immigration + white flight to safe schools aka supply and demand)
(*stagnant wages + higher housing costs = squeezed disposable income = stagnant economy)
Warren may have been utterly wrong in the dna test stuff but she’s no moron. This is a blatant attempt to guilt trip the white surburban woman vote and it subtly undermines the criticism over the dna test too. Now Warren may be seen as bravely sharing in the suffering of the non-privileged ascendant.
If Kamela Harris gets the nomination, I predict a mass blowout for Trump. Low information voters outside of California have never heard of her. Hillary got the nomination partially because she’d been around so long that everyone had heard of her. She was a known quantity, and people thought that because they knew Bill’s style of governing, they could guess what she would do. But–she still lost anyway. A no-name candidate like Harris is going to see a Reagan-like landslide for Trump.
Something that has not come up yet is Warren’s involvement in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. What started off sounding like a ‘good government’ consumer friendly agency was really just a government empowered shakedown the likes of which would have made Al Sharpton blush. So instead of looking like the smarty pants that Warren is, she looked like another left wing sponge.
I shudder to think of the conditions dominating US society when such lunatics as EW, BS, the Latina from NY etc, finally end up in their sought after by any form of subtrafuge, deception and brainwashing, eternal one-party (democrat) rule.
Bloodshed, economic breakdown, mayhem and pandemonia, an ugly vision, and hopefully not inevitable, as the anti-communist segment will not go down without a fight.
Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz performer.
No one wants to adopt black kids. If a black kid ends up in foster care, that’s pretty amazing considering that there’s tons of welfare for unmarried black mothers and eager-beaver social workers ready to help the mother out with every bit of the paperwork and to help navigate the rules.
When a black kid ends up in foster care, it’s a sign that the kid’s parents are truly, massively evil or inept and stupid to the point where 80 points of IQ looks high. We’re talking incredibly bad genes in that family. The kid is going to grow up to be a disaster no matter what the parenting.
i agree with you about the internal dynamics but i think people are a bit too locked into seeing this in black-white terms:
– the growing hispanic part of the coalition will see it as their turn (cos Obama)
– the corporate donors will want a puppet
and the corporate Dems have been grooming Castro for that role for a while – he’s not very good but then neither is/was Macron but if you’re the banker’s candidate you get full media backing.
One of the advantages of anti-white male bashing is that it doesn't cost anything. So identity politics is a great way to buy off the base without having to raise taxes on corporations or the rich.
This is a real issue now that the Democrats are the de facto party of upper class professionals and big corporations. Going full-socialist is a non-starter for these groups. They would much prefer to virtue signal about "white privilege" (as per Warren's remarks), than to pay higher taxes. "Let them eat virtue signals," could be the slogan of the Democratic elite in 2020.
As to Hispanics, their day is a long way off. Hispanics are too politically passive and unorganized compared to blacks, Jews, and white liberals. Also, White Liberals get far more virtue points for supporting Blacks.
For now, the role of Hispanics in the Democratic party is to just keep passively supplying the margin of victory for Democrats in the general election. As far as the primaries go, "don't call us, we'll call you."
I think you’re focusing on the more outlandish and ridiculous elements of the so-called “manosphere” in making your critique.
A lot of what is argued is simply the stuff that fathers used to teach their young boys before mass culture as a vector for feminism. “Faint heart never won fair lady,” “be a man,” “don’t let a girl disrespect you,” “just kiss her” and so forth. Pretty much any man can improve his relations with women by dismissing what mass culture tells men and boys (i.e. be sensitive and deferential) in favor of behavior to which women react more favorably. It’s more an act of deprogramming than anything. Don’t “be yourself” if you’ve internalized society’s commands that you be a wet dishrag, “be yourself” liberated from those commands.
The manosphere’s point about the so-called “conformist track” is that it used to afford a man social respect and the respect of his woman. A man could be decent, productive, and act with social probity and still win the devotion of a good woman in her prime years who would bear him children. Being a jerk or a rebel had real social costs, so there was a tradeoff to be made by men in deciding how to act, and for women with regard to which sorts of men to be found with.
It’s also a Chinese and Japanese thing and sometimes a Korean and Vietnamese thing.
GDP per capita in China lower than Mexico to this day.
Confucius say, these are massively corrupt failed societies, what Europeans explorers called The Asian Disease.
she has to get nominated first and to stand a chance the white candidates have to be the most anti–white.
my guess is they think if they (media/dems/gope) can prevent Trump from delivering on immigration then his vote will be depressed and even a poor candidate can win.
it’s a direct contradiction of statistics she herself compiled – evil woman
https://www.thewrap.com/mortal-engines-bomb-2018-box-office/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRsFc2gguEg
it is – as the banking mafia’s main bases tend to turn into effectively independent predatory city-states over time.
A mass without capable leaders with eventually lose cohesion. The interesting thing about the coalition of the fringes is that the people who put it together and held it together, historically speaking, have been white males. Without their leadership and advice, the coalition will fall apart. Remember how Bill told Hillary not to ignore the rust belt states, and she did and blew it? That's what happens when you ignore white male advice.
Good point. I wonder what Gavin Newsome or Beto O’Rourke think in their heart-of-heart’s about identity politics when they reflect on the fact that it has made them unelectable for national office.
On the other hand, white men are still perfectly electable as Democrats (for now) on the state and local level. So it’s really more of a cap than a barrier. (A “melanin-testosterone ceiling”?).
I’m not sure the Massachusetts Rachel Dolezal has a chance to get the nomination. Every minority who votes in the Democratic primary is going to remember that the 99% white Warren lied about her race to gain an advantage. If you’re black or Hispanic, why should you give her a pass on this? Hillary, at least, never lied about her race.
Someone posted a photo of Warren in the early part of her career in which she looked like she dyed her hair black and styled it to look more Indian, and if this photo gets passed around, she will become as vilified as Rachel Dolezal.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/GeraldineFerraro.jpghttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Jessica_Savitch.jpg
“I’ll take one from Column A and one from Column B, Monty.”
One interesting aspect to the upcoming presidential election is that with 30 wannabes there probably won’t be a clear front runner establishment candidate in the Democratic party like in 2016. That means the billionaire super donors will not be able to throw money money into the Democratic party the way they did for Hillary Clinton because there is an increasing possibility that a radical will emerge as the party leader.
In the short run this might help old white women like Warren and Pelosi because they will be seen as transitional figures who can still attract funding and the dwindling white votes on the left while not being total pro-Palestine, BLM, Reconquistas.
Isteve:
Wondered if you have any comments/insights/questions/ideas regarding the Gulen Flynn thing. I know you have been amused by the Byzantine of the Ottomans in the past. I don’t keep track of it all, but appreciate your take.
Also, think you are wicked smart and innovative, but I don’t keep up here either since it becomes too depressing at times. So mea maxima if you already gave some comments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A
these comments are pure evil.
white democrats know they have no chance of being nominated unless they crank up the anti-white venom so that's what she's doing - i'm glad it's not going to help her and she'll end up hated by everyone instead.
(*stagnant wages = mass immigration + off-shoring aka supply and demand)
(*housing costs = mass immigration + white flight to safe schools aka supply and demand)
(*stagnant wages + higher housing costs = squeezed disposable income = stagnant economy)
What are you referring to?
(of course she didn't explain what was causing those two things but she is one of the few Dems numerate enough to know she's contradicting her own research)
they’re doing directly what the US media is trying to do indirectly
As the reality of the demographic displacement becomes clearer and Dem candidates like Warren and mainstream media (e.g. NYT’s board member Sarah Jeong) harp on and on about the evil of whiteness, more and more of the white vote will abandon the Dem party.
Whether the GOP is smart enough to take advantage of this remains to be seen. But there will no doubt be Republican presidential candidates after Trump that will attempt to do so.
divide and rule is used to attack enemies
Because then people will suddenly see? A giant hulking dude can claim to be a woman, engage in sports where he gets to beat the living crap out of actual women, and they do not see. Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome, and they do not see. Inner cities across America have declined and they do not see.
I submit that hoping things get really ridiculous or bad so that the people will see is a bad strategy.
they do see
but people are social animals – they conform to the current dominant culture until the day they don’t.
The term privilege was chosen specifically to conflate the connections and career advancement opportunities available to someone from the Bush or Kennedy family with a working-class White guy with the last name O’Neill.
It's just like the case with abortion. Three decades ago the main arguments of the pro-aborts revolved around the idea that nothing wrong was being done because the unborn baby didn't meet some technical definition of personhood. "It isn't human being, it's just a lump of cells," was the basic notion in soundbite form. Now nobody even bothers with that pretense. The argument is more like, "Of course it's a human being, but so what? It's an inconvenient person living in my body and I can kill him if I feel like it."
Once you start playing games with right and wrong, once you start allowing exceptions to the natural law, the path from legal niceties to Who?-Whom? is inescapable.
if you argue with the kind of white SJWs who come from comfortable all-white backgrounds most of them still think that way cos they believe the media’s false version of reality.
Hillary Clinton, I’d argue she lost in part because of her flirtation with BLM and her general embrace of SJWism.
Still you’re probably right, this type of talk will not be a hard barrier for most Dems.
- the growing hispanic part of the coalition will see it as their turn (cos Obama)
- the corporate donors will want a puppet
and the corporate Dems have been grooming Castro for that role for a while - he's not very good but then neither is/was Macron but if you're the banker's candidate you get full media backing.
You are right about corporate donors wanting a puppet. But I think there is no shortage of puppets available.
One of the advantages of anti-white male bashing is that it doesn’t cost anything. So identity politics is a great way to buy off the base without having to raise taxes on corporations or the rich.
This is a real issue now that the Democrats are the de facto party of upper class professionals and big corporations. Going full-socialist is a non-starter for these groups. They would much prefer to virtue signal about “white privilege” (as per Warren’s remarks), than to pay higher taxes. “Let them eat virtue signals,” could be the slogan of the Democratic elite in 2020.
As to Hispanics, their day is a long way off. Hispanics are too politically passive and unorganized compared to blacks, Jews, and white liberals. Also, White Liberals get far more virtue points for supporting Blacks.
For now, the role of Hispanics in the Democratic party is to just keep passively supplying the margin of victory for Democrats in the general election. As far as the primaries go, “don’t call us, we’ll call you.”
In a sense, a white marriage is a conspiracy against the US Government. It hurts USG's numbers because it increases inequality. It hurts USG's feelings because even liberal white marrieds engage in white flight (looking for a 'great school district' and a 'good house in a great neighborhood') or gentrification.
The solution for USG is to continue to expand the child support regime at the expense of the marriage conspiracy.
h/t Dalrock
The three Somali guys I worked with for years have sired eighteen young ‘uns between them, all of them within wedlock. That’s a conspiracy against the US Government!
One white manager two of whose kids worked for us as teens told us that those two have produced 16 of his 19 grandchildren in the meantime. Unfortunately, it appears the one with 12 is heading for divorce. Pray for them– let’s not strengthen the hand of the feds.
the video i linked where she spelled out how the white middle class is being destroyed – stagnant wages combined with higher housing costs
(of course she didn’t explain what was causing those two things but she is one of the few Dems numerate enough to know she’s contradicting her own research)
Thanks to Roe, and lower behavior standards in general, there is a serious undersupply of white children available for adoption.
Even Madonna has to go to Malawi.
my guess is they think if they (media/dems/gope) can prevent Trump from delivering on immigration then his vote will be depressed and even a poor candidate can win.
I see. Then, when she campaigns in the general election, she can just pivot and speak from her 99.91% non-Injun side. Why are you not already a paid campaign consultant? HR must be slacking.
i'm saying as the dems become more overtly anti-white the remaining white Dems will compete to be the most anti-white in the few years remaining before they're not needed any more and can be thrown off the bus.
if you argue with white SJWs a lot you can see them purity spiraling this direction on a daily basis.
Whether the GOP is smart enough to take advantage of this remains to be seen. But there will no doubt be Republican presidential candidates after Trump that will attempt to do so.
ultimately yes but i think they’re banking on being able to guilt-trip enough white suburban soccer moms just long enough to get white minority status and after that it won’t matter.
The average Chinese person earns a lot less than a black American and yet has a lot more wealth.
Oh, well. The left will ensure that the Trump era is the peak of American history because they will follow it with certain decline.
There are two factors that correlate strongly with national wealth above all others: Capitalism and national IQ. The left seems to want to wreak both at the same time. If they succeed, we will see a decline on rocket fuel.
The most cutting tweets ever will be the tweets where Trump, in his old age, mocks the American decline that comes after.
Oh, I was hoping one of the few bright sides of the coming collapse after Peak Stupidity would be the destruction of the twittering infrastructure. Damn.
Warren’s stupid pandering is so obvious that maybe even her target audience will see through it.
How is she going to grab all those white, suburban women if she talks like that anyway?
How do you market to a coalition of the fringes? We are seeing the beginning of what a cluster fuck such an operation will end up being.
Oh, wait a minute, I forgot about evil white men being the glue that holds it all together.
Berkeley is about to improve. Four Asian (Han) on their city council. I suspect that like the anti-homeless initiative in Orange County they have had enough.
That’s not what the article said. Two( or one and half) are on city council, an ABCD(South Asian) woman, and another guy with a Korean mother.
Jenny Wong is merely the city auditor, which is not unlike John Chiang, Betty Yee, etc. at state level. That had long been an Asian-American niche for the record keeping/accounting positions all the way back to March Fong Eu in California.
James Chang is on the rent stabilization board, and being Taiwanese-American, may count as Pacific Island rather than full-blood Han.
Nicky González Yuen, is on the board of local community college. And based on his name/look, is Filipino Chinese without small amount of Han heritage at this point.
One of the advantages of anti-white male bashing is that it doesn't cost anything. So identity politics is a great way to buy off the base without having to raise taxes on corporations or the rich.
This is a real issue now that the Democrats are the de facto party of upper class professionals and big corporations. Going full-socialist is a non-starter for these groups. They would much prefer to virtue signal about "white privilege" (as per Warren's remarks), than to pay higher taxes. "Let them eat virtue signals," could be the slogan of the Democratic elite in 2020.
As to Hispanics, their day is a long way off. Hispanics are too politically passive and unorganized compared to blacks, Jews, and white liberals. Also, White Liberals get far more virtue points for supporting Blacks.
For now, the role of Hispanics in the Democratic party is to just keep passively supplying the margin of victory for Democrats in the general election. As far as the primaries go, "don't call us, we'll call you."
heh
In the 19 th century Paraguay outlawed marriage between people of the same race to eliminate the criollos. Didn’t work in the long run.
Welcome to the party, pal. There are a lot of us around here, doing the amateur political consulting that American professional political consultants just won’t do. HR says my resume is in the pipeline awaiting a background check. How about you?
Excellent idea, a taste of Somalia, if I may.
I've been fascinated by African cuisine ever since I was invited to eat at an Ethiopian restaurant in the early 1990's. Of course, I looked up traditional Ethiopian food on the nascent Internet and found that it consisted mostly of small amounts of bark and nuts, usually followed by long periods of famine. I never went back to the restaurant.
Impoverished backwaters for millennia until the Pax Americana in Asia.
GDP per capita in China lower than Mexico to this day.
Confucius say, these are massively corrupt failed societies, what Europeans explorers called The Asian Disease.
i didn’t say it was a good strategy.
i’m saying as the dems become more overtly anti-white the remaining white Dems will compete to be the most anti-white in the few years remaining before they’re not needed any more and can be thrown off the bus.
if you argue with white SJWs a lot you can see them purity spiraling this direction on a daily basis.
I spent 1/2 hour vainly looking through the Democrat-Party campaign strategy lesson planner and could find nothing about being unaware of any pervasive … what now?
However, as to your 2nd guess, right there on page 3 (after the table of contents), I found:
“At the end of this lesson, the candidate shall be able to lie baldly and without shame”. There, duckduckgo is your friend.
A lot of what is argued is simply the stuff that fathers used to teach their young boys before mass culture as a vector for feminism. "Faint heart never won fair lady," "be a man," "don't let a girl disrespect you," "just kiss her" and so forth. Pretty much any man can improve his relations with women by dismissing what mass culture tells men and boys (i.e. be sensitive and deferential) in favor of behavior to which women react more favorably. It's more an act of deprogramming than anything. Don't "be yourself" if you've internalized society's commands that you be a wet dishrag, "be yourself" liberated from those commands.
The manosphere's point about the so-called "conformist track" is that it used to afford a man social respect and the respect of his woman. A man could be decent, productive, and act with social probity and still win the devotion of a good woman in her prime years who would bear him children. Being a jerk or a rebel had real social costs, so there was a tradeoff to be made by men in deciding how to act, and for women with regard to which sorts of men to be found with.
Excellent comment!
Over at Z man somebody proposed a fake leftist splinter party to siphon off votes. Why not, gay marriage mandatory, all Black dudes have fractional ownership of Whites via an app, nationalize Google and Facebook and give every Black person ownership, install Louis Farrakhan as heads of both, etc.
The more hard left virtue signalling the better.
Otherwise get ready for President Harris or Oprah.
I’m looking forward to virtue-signaling black-on-white-male and hard femdom sexual releasefests on stage as flag-waving liberals cheer from the aisles and Twitter won’t censor the uploads because diversitarianism is where it’s at as Wolf Blitzer explodes on CNN trying to describe the votorgasmisc pandemonium.
Excerpt from one of Woody Allens 1970-80’s young girlfriends, Christina Engelhardtecent, Hollywood Reporter article.
She was played in “Manhattan” by uber-gentile Ernest Hemingway’s granddaughter.
Implicit/subtle anti-whiteness used to be enough, but now the democrat base and media demands that the anti-white rhetoric be raw, uncut and explicit.
Be nice if someone would ask Warren, just exactly how the rules are different for white families. I always hear about my white privileges, but never how to use/take advantage of them.
“I always hear about my white privileges, but never how to use/take advantage of them.”.
You sound like a thirsty fish to me. So immersed in water, you imagine you feel dry.
All meant sarcastically, of course.
Saying this to a group of impressionable young black kids is a form of child abuse.
This woman is a disgrace
Simple. You are so correct. Warren points out to blacks that whites are no good and then she will be surprised when almost all the black voters and SJWs cast their ballots for Harris or Booker.
By the anatomy.
Warren 2020 is a gift that will continue giving. In the primary she siphons Nice White Lady votes from, say, Kamala Harris or scarier hard left candidates, while still having to pander for the minority vote in ways that can only set off a chain of problems for her and the Democrats.
For 2020 she is unelectable, with nothing going for her that a dozen others don’t have. Law professor is the about the least-popular background she could have chosen. Hillary Clinton, with better charisma and qualifications and two giant political machines under her full control, could not defeat the weaker Trump-16. I imagine Trump-18 is praying that Warren run, which will also have the benefit of keeping her busy and less active on legislation.
Rules are rigged for whites, esp if they pretend to be Indian.
Absolutely tru what Rothschild stooge Warren is saying. She’s using e same divide n conquer strategy that Crown stooge Trump uses except to the other side. White families are not the enemy; politicians waging war on minorities (eg RethugliKKKlan fake drug war) are. RethugliKKKlans have no solidarity with blacks so they are the enemy too.
Should we assume that her game is to “capture the presidency”?
If she truly believes white families are the privileged enemy…
…then why wouldn’t Candidate Warren opt out of politics and cede all government ground as a Reparations Reservation for the melanistic and downtrodden? Hand over that talking stick, Candidate Cheekbones!!!!
She can afford it surely. Liz and her (second) hubby, the estates and trusts legal scholar at Harvard Law, bring in about a million bucks a year. Not counting Harvard bennies, plus I’d think he has something from all those years at Penn Law; she as well.
And 1% wealth doesn’t matter if you pass the Attleboro lefty sniff test via virtue signalling.
http://archive.is/SJVeC
It’s just yall white [email protected] families–you who sell your time for shekels–who get the boot and the derision for having all that privilege and the rules rigged in favor of you.
Plus Pocahantas got a nice divorce settlement from Jim Warren, her ex, a mathematician and IBM and NASA engineer. He was, we’re told, he was father of her two (now fortysomething) children. A genomic legacy upon which no dollar value has yet been systematically put. At least not in public.
Interestingly for us Sailertariat HBD auld pharts, Jim Warren was also one of the founders of FamilyTreeDNA.
Jim Warren (whose surname Liz kept) programmed computer algorithms for genetic analysis prior to his death in the Aughts. If I recall correctly, FT DNA’s development of their first Y-haplogroup testing algorithm used to be called the “Warren Project.”
Liz had plenty of chances to learn and to do math, you see. Instead she chose selling her female parts and cheekbones to Harvard Law and Penn Law. After all, when Liz was hired by Penn Law, being a white woman was sufficient AA street cred, though that was (((rapidly being changed))).
Being the wife of a driven quanty turbogeek isn’t for everyone. Her mating strategy was amply patrician–serial monogamy, via taking up with a law professor in her department iirc while still married, then dumping her hubby for him while the children were still very small but the paternal DNA secure. If there’s anything the Ivy League taught women in the 1930s to 1970s, it was to Marry Up.
(Speaking of….I’ve long wondered whether her younger kid has done DNA testing for his paternal haplogroup. The official accounts these days of Liz’s breakup in the late ’70s seem about as carefully PR-formulated–“oddly specific”–as Jill Stevenson Biden’s and Jacklyn Gise Jorgenson Bezos’s where events and dates are concerned. Every dumb thug on reality TV shows has to do a DNA paternity test. But the rich and famous can mythologize all they want about their ancestry, and nobody questions it. Nor their tribal “blood,” but that’s a separate topic.)
The entire “progressive” / “democratic” agenda at this point is to present Carnival Christianity to the masses–a complete inversion of what is good and what is degenerate.
It doesn’t make sense, Enochian. It’s not formulated to make sense. It’s formulated by people who want to destroy white families for demographic and population genetics reasons…and they have found the Philosophers’ Stone for it:
Somebody within DNC central–i.e., the Ford, Robert Wood Johnson, Packard, Kellogg, MacArthur, Heinz, Rock Brothers, etc., foundations–has read up on the neurobiology of religion.
They know that one of the fundamentals of a mass marketable religious system is the degree to which it is counter-rational and primes its audience with threat-related signalling from which the priests can save the supplicant.
http://www.pascalboyer.net/articles/Boyer2003ReligionTiCS.pdf
Ya see, Enochian, Liz Warren is not speaking as Chief Cheekbones, Wise-um Election Strategist Medicine Woman here.
Liz Warren is speaking as a high priestess of the coven of unending, perpetual, ever-escalating Bizarro World. Where the .001% propagate their genes as part of Big Globo…while you and yours are slated for replacement as fully fungible not-yet-mechanized/automated/centrally controlled via AI units in their global hive.
Funding all this is precisely what I said above:
Urban hive-life billionaires (with massive remote rural doom estancias waiting in the wings for when their whole tower of crap collapses) trying to subvert nationalism and other globo-derided forms of affiliation by ceding all government ground to a Reparations Reservation for the melanistic, overseen by chiefs of their own selection.
These foundation billionaires and their paid retainers have their psychological strategies and propaganda messaging down tight. Also their population strategies for genociding Winter People, who are too uppity, independent, and individualistic to bow to their insectoid overlords.
~15K comments on womans DNA test reveal.
American blacks know they are mixed race but they assume it was massa raping their great great grandmother so naturally they expect their white ancestry to be in the paternal line. Any sex between white men and black women in the slavery period was by definition rape but any sex between white women and black men was what?
DoD will not take people with an IQ below 83. Recruiting below IQ 83 was tried during the McNamara era and failed badly. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J2VwFDV4-g if you can take a _really_ sad story.
Average Black IQ in the United States is, according to generally accepted HBD, about 85, S.D. 12. _That_ implies about 43% of the Black population _cannot do anything economically productive_ in an industrialized society. Given the degree of racial identity among Blacks, accepting the utter inability of half their number to earn a living wage (or any kind of wage except money in exchange for negative value, such as not hurting people during robberies or not destroying property) would be fatal to their ability to continue reproducing. This inability was cited (and presented to the public in films) during the civil rights propaganda campaigns during the 1960s. Integration and the provision of welfare/patronage "jobs" to the lucky 57% destroyed a working Black economy that provided a real basis for Black pride, and gave the illusion that _no_ Black could succeed in a White society.
This is the real White privilege, this and the "intact families" mentioned by Sen. Warren. The essential assertion of the Left, under the HBD interpretation, is that racial groups that have not adapted over several hundred (or perhaps thousand) years are simply _unable_ to live in industrialized societies. Basic Christianity says that this is evil, as all people have equal value in the eyes of God. Rawls says that _any_ difference in outcomes violates the "Original Position" (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/#OriPos) and is thus not "just". Therefore, the HBD position that some groups are better adopted to industrial society means that (a) industrial society is intrinsically unjust, or that (b) industrial society must be changed to ensure equality of opportunity for any group in its vicinity (in the world, under current interpretations).
Suppose, however, that industrial society doesn't have the economic surplus to support a large non-participant group, and would transform into another system with even _less_ equality between groups? The possibility seems an important one, since the USSR collapsed from precisely that cause. Rawls gives no answer. Neither do his present day disciples.
We are therefore left with an intrinsically unjust society (under Christianity and Rawls both). This is taken quite seriously by the descendants of the New England Protestants (who were largely responsible for the US Civil War, and apparently are happy to risk another one), by various groups who are severely adapted to industrial society and want continue to exist outside of it, by other groups that wish to dominate the existing industrial society, and by yet other groups that hope to transform US industrial society to that of their ancestral regions.
Well, what did you expect? Western theory says that all humans have original sin, that existence is tragic ("that which I should do and want to do, I do not, and that which I should not do, and do not want to do, that I do.").
A "liberal person" has historically been a person who gives away his own property to others. A contemporary liberal gives away the property of third parties to others, usually getting the property by a threat of imposing negative value on the third party. Much of that is justified by reference to Rawls and Christianity, but (obviously) without referencing the tragedy of human life. I, personally, have seen most my friends killed, much of my family killed, some friends and relatives driven insane, a technological stagnation except in information systems that has greatly increased the human death rate and poisoning with industrial waste. Do the disciples of Rawles care about that? Who cares about that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z80BrugnLVs
One further comment: I remember back when the US was sold on Civil Rights and on an early version of tolerance. We were told that we were in a life and death struggle with communism, and that we could all die within any given 15 minute interval (that being the flight time for an ICBM from the USSR). Much of that was true -- after 1990, it turned out that the USSR believed in saturation bombing, and had allocated some 500 tactical nuclear devices to West Germany alone. Some of it was false -- the Russian leadership had seen the Russsian Front during WW II, and didn't want to see it again (Nicky the K: Q. Did you ever visit the front in Stalingrad? {Horrible scene, bulldozers used to bury fields strewn with frozen body parts.} A. Yes, but I didn't go back.) The USSR's leadership didn't really want to start WW II. They wanted to stay home, hug their knees, and wait until the shuddering went away. At least they had sense, a rare commodity anywhere.
But that's over. The Cold War ended about 30 years ago, a bit over a generation. President Trump has successfully withdrawn the US from the coalition assembled to fight the Cold War. He had little choice: The US would have very soon gone bankrupt had it continued to bribe other coalition members with pieces of the US economic base. In fact, I suspect that this is the reason that Israel is backing Trump and the US Reformed Judaism establishment (the New York establishment, effectively) isn't: Israel needs the US long term, NYC establishment doesn't think long term.
And since the Cold War is over and the US is disengaged (that's the "damage" the TDS people talk about), there is no longer any reason for the US base population to be nice to anybody. No reason at all.
See Copley, _Uncivilization_.
Available here:
http://www.artofvictory.com/UnCivilization-Download.htm
She’s also from the same commonwealth as Michael Dukakis, John Kerry, and Mitt Romney. How’d they do?
To be precise, it was 0.35% Amerindian. That was her actual result.
People were all playing with fractions on this because the expert interviewed by the Boston Globe proposed a range of how many generations ago the miscegenation event may have occurred. Based on the actual 0.35% result, the expert very liberally estimated a range “6 to 10 generations ago,” i.e., 8 generations +/- 2 generations, which set the tone for the R-team vs. D-team foodfight that ensued.
If one insists on fractions, the test result (0.35%) means Elizabeth Warren’s genetic test yielded 1/285th Amerindian. This could mean one 90%-Amerindian individual 8 generations ago (born c.1700-1750).
Anyone who has browsed through 23andMe profiles will know that a tenth or two or three Amerindian is hardly the shock of the century for a US White with colonial ancestry (needless to say). But the 1/64th thing was always a misdirection, as was the 1/1024th used by many on Fox News etc.
There's some chance that Prof. Bustamante of Stanford was overly cautious and the best guess might be higher.
i'm saying as the dems become more overtly anti-white the remaining white Dems will compete to be the most anti-white in the few years remaining before they're not needed any more and can be thrown off the bus.
if you argue with white SJWs a lot you can see them purity spiraling this direction on a daily basis.
Your middle paragraph makes sense. It’s a matter of timing for the remaining white ones, or excuse me, 99.91% white/0.009% Injun ones, then.
I try to avoid arguments with those people by just avoiding those people.
Is Marriage for White People?Sen. Warren accurately points out that Whites increase inequality through their capital accumulation, marriages and aversion to making financial transfers outside of the direct descendant-ancestor line. (With an exception for a sibling that has cancer).
Remember, this chick was married to one of the founders of FamilyTreeDNA. She knows what’s up, genetically speaking. But she speaks with (((forked))) Ivy League tongue, translating the rule of law into the rule of pillage:
The top-tier “foundation left” and some of their academic outposts have already figured out that all their forms of taxation are, in effect, genetic taxes.
Example: Liz didn’t have to pay for the genes she took from Jim Warren–the turbogeek engineer and mathematician and a founder of FT DNA–to produce her offspring. She took those offspring/genes to another family unit/man/household absolutely for free, just as I presume she took at least some years of support for those offspring from him while they were still married.
But she will insist that you pay 60% tax or whatever on anything you work for and accumulate and preserve that you want to pass down in YOUR family when you croak.
The (((bolshie))) left has always been about disrupting all forms of White people’s genetic strategies, expressed as family formation and wealth transfer.
When you start to unpack “progressive” tax regimes it’s quite astonishing how utterly grounded they are in genomic warfare and theft. The whole point of the open borders welfare state is to cripple Whites’ ability to have children and pass down wealth to them.
It all comes back to GeneWar.
One quibble: Whites don’t increase inequality. “Increase inequality” is a euphemism for “strengthen their own population.”
We are supposed to like being yoked to destroying our own people/offspring and ancestral legacies, while handing it all over to strengthen OTHERS’ populations. That is equal, fair, and just, they say. WE are the thieves…for having had ancestors who strengthened and preserved their genomic capacities and ability to function as a group.
I have this argument a lot with Christians of my acquaintance. The ones who spend X months a year in OogaBoogaLand, handing out First World medical services or infrastructure. Never mind that people closely genetically related to them right here in the US lack or need those services. Their “religions” are literally formulas for destruction and theft of their own genetic pool. And many of these folks are ranchers and other livestock owners who would never think of doing this with, say, their cattle, sheep, or goats.
“Is Senator Warren just being an inept yokel again”
Yes.
“or is attacking “white families” now smart politics given the demographics of the Democratic primaries”
No.
“and the current media crusade against whiteness and Beckys?”
Sailer’s first law of NOTICING THE UNNOTICED–The media, mainstream or alternative, furnishes us with convenient concepts, such as “media crusade against whiteness” and “Beckys”, that make it easier to remember the facts they prefer you to know and harder to remember the facts that undermine the concepts.
Yes that is how the Democrat party is constituted now. Have you noticed that they don’t want a border anymore? They have reached the conclusion that any sort of immigration control is not in their interests. Thus the rhetoric of abolishing ICE etc. That is because they have reached the conclusion that anyone wanting a border is not their voting block anymore.
Whether the GOP is smart enough to take advantage of this remains to be seen. But there will no doubt be Republican presidential candidates after Trump that will attempt to do so.
“As the reality of the demographic displacement becomes clearer and Dem candidates like Warren and mainstream media (e.g. NYT’s board member Sarah Jeong) harp on and on about the evil of whiteness, more and more of the white vote will abandon the Dem party.”
Nope. White normies see right through Warren and her little Asian pet Jeong. But we appreciate your concern trolling. Now back to regular scheduled Alt Right programming.
“but any sex between white women and black men was what?”
Strictly forbidden. The white masters wanted to have their cake and eat it, too.
http://www.criticalcommons.org/Members/mattdelmont/clips/roots-chicken-george-learns-about-his-father
She can use Joe Crowley’s campaign slogan: “I can’t help that I was born white.”
One thing about Warren is she’s not a good speaker. She’s shrill and she shouts a lot, but her voice is weak. She pokes the air with her finger, and instead of enlisting her audience, she lectures and scolds.
In a normal world she’d be the principal of a fancy girls’ school, preparing them to enter society with a sense of poise and grace, thank you very much young lady.
Not convinced another blonde, Ivy league, mean-to-the-help country club matron is the best choice for the Dems. That’s how she comes across, whatever fema-socialist demagoguery comes out of her mouth.
Lots of things are forbidden and yet they still exist. Such as this woman’s great, great grandmother, the product of sex between a black man and a white woman.
It’s only an incitement to violence when other people do it.
Speaking of Harvard professors, Roland Fryer was me-tooed recently and is banned from the office building where he works, pending the final decision of the university sex tribunal.
Wait, there’s more. Harvard Crimson just reported what amounts to the end of Fryer’s career:
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/12/16/fryer-two-more-investigations/
https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/f4-large.jpgIs The 26% against Fryer? If so, why?
From Steve Sailer reposting of someone's comments on Roland Fryer, May 2018:
True.
Jewish political power made attacking Whites cool… scumbag types like Warren are happy to go along for the ride to further their careers.
Her statements are no more surprising than the stink emanating from toxic black mold.
3/3 of her names place her as a member of “The 26%” at Harvard:
Is The 26% against Fryer? If so, why?
From Steve Sailer reposting of someone’s comments on Roland Fryer, May 2018:
She’s a very good bankruptcy professor, consumer side. Rutgers-Newark in the ‘70s? It must have been rough. I used their library in the mid 80s. Tough town.
Someone posted a photo of Warren in the early part of her career in which she looked like she dyed her hair black and styled it to look more Indian, and if this photo gets passed around, she will become as vilified as Rachel Dolezal.
You really do have to wonder what Warren was, and is, thinking about the whole AA scam she’s perpetrated. Black hair for a while, then a switch to honey blonde just when she’s breaking out into the national spotlight, all the while claiming to be — sort of, quietly, in a ‘nuanced’ way — a POC.
I mean, what she’s done — building a spectacular career by participating unjustly in an unjust system of preferences — is doubly immoral, but on the other hand, it’s pretty audacious, when you think about it. Which other white person has risen so far by playing, in both senses of the word, the AA game?
And even after her national DNA humiliation, she’s not politically dead yet.
No matter what happens to Warren, she’s had quite a run.
“Famous last words.”
It has been demonstrated to death, and by several different routes, that Ron was off by a factor of 2 in the likely number of Jews at Harvard.
There are many other problems with his article, some of which were exposed by the Harvard admissions trial. For example, the argument that Asian admission did not follow Asian population growth turned out to be false. Asian application numbers have not grown since 1995.
There’s no point to forbidding that which doesn’t exist.
Asian application numbers have not grown since 1995.
Really? Haven’t all application numbers grown a lot? Haven’t the number of overseas Asians applying to American colleges gone up a lot since 1995? Aren’t there a lot more Asian Americans than in 1995?
Link?
(In item 1, it should say "(or lower than)", not higher, as the relationship that would go against Unz' theory)
http://andrewgelman.com/2013/02/12/that-claim-that-harvard-admissions-discriminate-in-favor-of-jews-after-checking-the-statistics-maybe-not/#comment-914135
Other discussion at those links is also relevant but disorganized. Both pages refer to the analysis at
http://sites.google.com/site/nuritbaytch/
Those summarize some of the main problems with Ron's argument on Jewish percentages. If I have more time (probably in 2019) I can provide a fuller set of references.
The Asian percentage of applications has fluctuated but not increased overall since 1995.
Here is the graph from a Twitter post. It originated in the Harvard Crimson trial coverage but I do not have a link to the latter at hand.
The graph shows that there have been two decorrelations between applied and admitted. First, a weakening of the very tight relationship that had existed until the mid-1980’s. Increased admissions competition is one guess as to why. Second, another decorrelation starting about 10 years ago. It doesn’t look like the anti-correlation from a loose quota, and there are some natural causes such as the variation in Asians not reporting race (which escalated in mid to late 2000’s), and in who gets counted as Asian (2010’s). It is also the time period for which statistical studies were done for the trial, and have much more information than the graph.
So the plateau in Asian application was from 1991 to 2014, the last year of data, not 1995-2018.
Decorrelations happened in early 1980's and mid-2000's. The shifted dates align better with the causes I suggested: the admissions battle heating up, and the trend for Asians to not report race, which came out of studies that became public around 2004.
To the extent that she presents evidence it is that redlining was good for Blacks.
"Finally, during the 1960s, redlining was banned. And over the next twenty-five years or so, black families started building more wealth. The black-white wealth gap began to shrink. And that might have been the end of the story."
"*Black homeownership rates are now lower than they were when housing discrimination was legal. Today, the black-white wealth gap is bigger than it was back in the 1960s. (I can't figure out the astrict in front of Black, but it is there on her web page, does she have staff issues?)"
Buried later in the speech she implies she just wants to level the playing field even though eliminating redlining did the opposite:
"Pit white working people against black and brown working people so they won't band together and demand real change." (After Pres Hopey Changy the D candidates should avoid the words Hope and Change)
In part, the problem might be a lack of both talent and practice at speechifying. At 69 maybe the Jim Crow world of her childhood Norman Oklahoma and explains some of her world view. She arrives in Mass. long after the Great Migration and the race problems and sees a gentrified world, but does not see all the White losers of the Great Migration game as they are long gone and according to E Micheal Jones targeted to be forced out to dilute their voting power. She has no comment on Asians who appear to me to have the same privileges and advantages she claims White people have and are disproportionately going to be the new upper class. She also has to win the Democratic primary.
https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-delivers-commencement-address-at-morgan-state-university
Even though she is an older woman I'm kind of sweet on Sen Warren, this is the younger Sen Warren I choose to think about:
An all-voucher or all-school choice system would be a shock to the educational system, but the shake out might be just what the system needs…But over time, the whole concept of “the Beverly Hills schools” or “Newton schools” would die out, replaced in the hierarchy by schools that offer a variety of programs that parents want for their children, regardless of the geographic boundaries. By selecting where to send their children (and where to spend their vouchers), parents would take control over schools’ tax dollars, making them the de facto owners of those schools.
http://www.aei.org/publication/elizabeth-warren-on-school-choice/
She might make an interesting, that is non-Ivy League, supreme court pick.
Don’t fool yourself. She is just another stupid leftist. At this point: us or them? These people are f*kn awful. Who/whom? That is all that is real. Realize it. Know it.
No.
You’re right. An example of what existed: Muhammad Ali had a white grandmother (in Kentucky).
https://www.unz.com/isteve/anti-semitic-far-right-terrorist-attacks-synagogue/#comment-2600959
(In item 1, it should say “(or lower than)”, not higher, as the relationship that would go against Unz’ theory)
http://andrewgelman.com/2013/02/12/that-claim-that-harvard-admissions-discriminate-in-favor-of-jews-after-checking-the-statistics-maybe-not/#comment-914135
Other discussion at those links is also relevant but disorganized. Both pages refer to the analysis at
http://sites.google.com/site/nuritbaytch/
Those summarize some of the main problems with Ron’s argument on Jewish percentages. If I have more time (probably in 2019) I can provide a fuller set of references.
You must not have followed the arguments. If you did, and know a way to defend Ron’s calculations against what was posted and linked, this would be a good time to share it.
It’s not hard to convince trolls of the Asian or anti-Jewish variety (or both) but actually addressing the counter-calculations takes more than that.
https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/The-most-heavily-Jewish-US-college-and-other-facts-about-Jews-at-American-colleges-437701
Agency, is the only white privilege. Whites have it, nobody else does.
I second your Somalian suggestion. My only concern, as an amateur political consultant, is that there might be some dissatisfaction in the black community about people getting special treatment who are just Africans and therefore only passing as black, which in America means African-American.
I’ve been fascinated by African cuisine ever since I was invited to eat at an Ethiopian restaurant in the early 1990’s. Of course, I looked up traditional Ethiopian food on the nascent Internet and found that it consisted mostly of small amounts of bark and nuts, usually followed by long periods of famine. I never went back to the restaurant.
Some of us more worldly amateur political consultants don't look down on differing cuisines as you seem to do. Broaden your horizons, Anon7. I was a little hesitant, too, at first. As you pointed out, this diverse cuisine is not your old one meat and 3 vegetables fare that we are used to in our little insular white people world.
As horrific as large-scale famine is, if our diverse cuisine becomes a casualty, I think that's worse -
- General Achmed E. Casey, US Army, 5 stars on my lapels, see 'em, they're very shiny.
Oh, how I long to see Kemala Harris debate Trump. He will so easily make such a fool of her.
It's a pipe dream, sure. But it's nice to dream.
Practically speaking this would tend to inflate housing costs, just as giving out student loans increased college costs.
It’s been too long, but I do recall someone (perhaps you) claiming 12%, and that was hilarious.
The Jerusalem Post puts it where Ron and pretty much everyone else put it: at 25%.
https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/The-most-heavily-Jewish-US-college-and-other-facts-about-Jews-at-American-colleges-437701
The graph is labelled by years of graduation (“Class of …”), not admission, so shift by 4 years to get calendar years.
So the plateau in Asian application was from 1991 to 2014, the last year of data, not 1995-2018.
Decorrelations happened in early 1980’s and mid-2000’s. The shifted dates align better with the causes I suggested: the admissions battle heating up, and the trend for Asians to not report race, which came out of studies that became public around 2004.
Someone posted a photo of Warren in the early part of her career in which she looked like she dyed her hair black and styled it to look more Indian, and if this photo gets passed around, she will become as vilified as Rachel Dolezal.
Considering that Elizabeth Warren dyed her hair jet black and parted it in the middle, Indian squaw style, in the era of big hair, the late 1980s, her choice is quite likely to have been deliberate and calculated. By comparison, other, professional women who were blondes, even those older than Warren was then, had quite different hairstyles that tended to emphasize their hair color.
Change The Rules is a slogan getting plenty of exposure in Australia, too.
It must appeal to Low Information Voters, the same people Elizabeth Warren would be depending on to catapult her into the Oval WigWam.
Obama was a no name and he won. Of course, Obama didn’t sound like an idiot like Harris does.
Okay so you consider preaching, regurgitating SJ and DNC platitudes to the point of painfulness for any intelligent listener to not "sounding like an idiot"
You are clueless.
Authenticjazzman "Mensa" qualifed since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz musician.
If it’s hilarious, find any source who has been to Harvard College in the relevant time period and says it is above 10-15 percent. There is no shortage of Asian college kids posting Unz’ article online, and there should be a lot of white Gentiles there (not to mention administrators or faculty) who are unhappy with the state of things if Ron is right, and have access to the student directory. Oddly, none of them have come forward, not even anonymously, to validate his estimates through anecdote or replication of Ron’s surname analysis.
None of the numbers you cite (such as Jerusalem Post) come from anything but the “old Hillel” estimates which are unreliable for reasons explained. Mathematically impossible single-year intakes, unknown methodology, contradicted by several other data. Hillel itself could not explain how they arrived at their number.
A sociologists’ survey of 5500 Harvard College undergrads, with multiple questions clarifying precisely in what sense people categorized themselves as Jewish, estimated 11 to 14 percent as “Jews in the broad sense” of having Jewish ancestry, identity or religious affiliation. I’ll have to check the year, maybe 2014, but it was more recent than Ron’s article. The link to the survey results was posted here in the past few months.
The sociologists also found, in that survey and similar ones at UPenn and dozens of other schools, that about 80 percent of college age Jews in the broad sense define themselves as Jews-by-religion, i.e., will answer Jewish to survey questions like “what is your religion” even if atheist or agnostic. This destroys Ron’s method of tripling the number of Jews in the Harvard Crimson freshman surveys (6-10 percent) to reconcile with his 25% estimate, on the theory that they answered based on religious belief. Based on these recent, large-sample surveys of exactly the population under discussion, the correct multiplier is 5/4 which puts the Crimson survey in line with a Jewish population of 13% or less.
Ron’s tripling method was based on a survey of religiosity (not religion) in 66 countries, that he never read, only linking to a newspaper article that quoted some figures from it. A bit over 100 Jews participated, of which roughly a third who had already identified as Jewish said they are religious. This is a tiny sample, has little to do with college-age American Jews, and the triple scale-up is answering a different question than the one needed to relate the Crimson survey to the Jewish enrollment. It’s pretty safe to say that line of defense is dead.
Every single independent estimate of the Harvard Jewish population is much lower than the “old Hillel” estimates of 20+ percent that Ron relies on, all are below 15%, with 10-13% being more credible. Nobody including the Harvard Hillel (when contacted by Nurit Baytch for her analysis) knows what that estimate was cooked from, how broadly it defined Jews, if they had any new data since 1992, or if they used data at all rather than guesswork.
One of those independent methods of estimation is to use the same surname counting that Ron did on the National Merit Semifinalist lists on Harvard student and alumni directories. This was done by Baytch in her article, leading to an estimate of (iirc) 10-12% Jews at Harvard College and a similar number as the “meritocratic” number based on NMS state lists weighted by the states’ representation at Harvard.
The only defense Ron has of the Harvard 25% estimate is to continually cite the preposterous “old Hillel” Harvard numbers as definitive authority because, being the only published data on this obscure question until very recently, they were recycled for years in other publications. This is illogical, if predictable as a way to avoid humiliation and reputational damage. The Hillel.org website has much lower figures (also in the 10-15% range) for Harvard in recent years, which Ron explains as a Jewish conspiracy to hide the truth, which is a funny sort of concealment if it brings them into line with every other estimating of the same number. The more parsimonious explanation is that, as everyone who has been there lately and discussed this online has stated, that the old Hillel numbers were off. By a factor of about 2.
In any event, there is no way Trump can win in 2020 absent some major moves on his part, which I no longer think he's going to make. Whoever wins the Dem primary has the Presidency locked up.
What makes you believe this?
https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/The-most-heavily-Jewish-US-college-and-other-facts-about-Jews-at-American-colleges-437701
No. The Jerusalem Post doesn’t do anything here except to republish the Hillel number (“figures are estimated by the campus Hillels”, top of article). Ron quotes the Hillel numbers. Everyone else, until very recently, had no alternative source except the Hillel number, and so that was republished everywhere. Then Ron declared that this is a proof the Hillel numbers were solid: if everyone quotes it, it must be right.
We now have other estimates, some more solid than anything Hillel came up with in the past 25 years since the “religious preference cards” were discontinued, and some done by Ron’s own method of surname counting. All come up with roughly half of the 25% estimate. Ron hasn’t addressed this problem in any way other than to call those bringing it to his attention fanatics, Jewish berserkers and so forth.
It says 1,675 Jewish students at Harvard, or 25%. It's in the paragraph about Yale.
Whether the GOP is smart enough to take advantage of this remains to be seen. But there will no doubt be Republican presidential candidates after Trump that will attempt to do so.
How does one take advantage of this?
She is speaking their language already.
What do you mean?
Trump is terrible in debate. There’s no one worse, in either party.
Hogwash , he is a marvelous debater in the sense of winning or losing, and throwing his opponent off track.
You are not endowed with the abilities to descern and detect tactical and pschological cunningness, schrewdness.
AJM
The best guess would be 1/256th.
There’s some chance that Prof. Bustamante of Stanford was overly cautious and the best guess might be higher.
This is one of those Nixonian inaccuracies where further dispute only enhances my case.
I wanted to add the 0.35% figure, her actual result. This figure did not appear in the Boston Globe article. They instead presented it with the (perhaps) not-so-helpful concept of generation estimates with a very, very wide margin of error (6 to 10).
Muslims are generally hyper protective of their women. The men sometimes marry out, but it’s rare for the women to do so. It’s amazing that the Chinese govt is strong enough that it can coerce Muslim Uighur women into marrying Chinese men.
Truly something to behold.
It’s also interesting that the Chinese govt is basically practicing an explicitly racialist breeding policy.
I wonder if one day, far right Euro govts will force Muslim migrants to marry their women to White Christian males. That’d be something to see.
Remember that only white people can be racist, goy.
I've been fascinated by African cuisine ever since I was invited to eat at an Ethiopian restaurant in the early 1990's. Of course, I looked up traditional Ethiopian food on the nascent Internet and found that it consisted mostly of small amounts of bark and nuts, usually followed by long periods of famine. I never went back to the restaurant.
Heh!
Some of us more worldly amateur political consultants don’t look down on differing cuisines as you seem to do. Broaden your horizons, Anon7. I was a little hesitant, too, at first. As you pointed out, this diverse cuisine is not your old one meat and 3 vegetables fare that we are used to in our little insular white people world.
As horrific as large-scale famine is, if our diverse cuisine becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse –
– General Achmed E. Casey, US Army, 5 stars on my lapels, see ’em, they’re very shiny.
It must appeal to Low Information Voters, the same people Elizabeth Warren would be depending on to catapult her into the Oval WigWam.
Hey, thank you. I’m always looking for newer and better ways to make fun of people.
This is an interesting question: Is Senator Warren just being an inept yokel again, or is attacking “white families” now smart politics given the demographics of the Democratic primaries and the current media crusade against whiteness and Beckys?
I haven’t time to read all ~200 prior comments, so please forgive me if someone else has already said it, but Elizabeth Warren is playing the game according to the old rules, where Democrats could get away with saying shit like this because Republicans never called them on it. Trump is a horrible, terrible, awful president in many respects, but one thing he has conclusively shown Republicans is that you can win by punching back (twice as hard, you might say).
You could run an hours-long commercial with all of the nasty anti-white, anti-straight, anti-male, anti-American, anti-middle class, and anti-borders statements leading Democrats have made. And in the next presidential campaign someone almost certainly will.
” Of course O didn’t sound like an idiot” : Bullshit
Okay so you consider preaching, regurgitating SJ and DNC platitudes to the point of painfulness for any intelligent listener to not “sounding like an idiot”
You are clueless.
Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualifed since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz musician.
” Trump is terrible in debate”
Hogwash , he is a marvelous debater in the sense of winning or losing, and throwing his opponent off track.
You are not endowed with the abilities to descern and detect tactical and pschological cunningness, schrewdness.
AJM
Implicit/subtle anti-whiteness used to be enough, but now the democrat base and media demands that the anti-white rhetoric be raw, uncut and explicit.
Be nice if someone would ask Warren, just exactly how the rules are different for white families. I always hear about my white privileges, but never how to use/take advantage of them.
Let me unpack that for you. Your white privilege is invisible, like the air you breathe, which incidentally you are also stealing from POCs. It’s also invisible because it doesn’t exist, but don’t let on that I told you.
I haven't time to read all ~200 prior comments, so please forgive me if someone else has already said it, but Elizabeth Warren is playing the game according to the old rules, where Democrats could get away with saying shit like this because Republicans never called them on it. Trump is a horrible, terrible, awful president in many respects, but one thing he has conclusively shown Republicans is that you can win by punching back (twice as hard, you might say).
You could run an hours-long commercial with all of the nasty anti-white, anti-straight, anti-male, anti-American, anti-middle class, and anti-borders statements leading Democrats have made. And in the next presidential campaign someone almost certainly will.
Definitely not certain (not even a one-minute commercial), because anyone who dared to do so would be pilloried by the MSM as a Nazi and nice white ladies are very afraid of Nazis.
Even if a candidate doesn't do it there are plenty of people with the skills, time, and talent to do it for him. Unless it's deep-sixed by the Facebook and Google monopolies (certainly not unlikely) it will make the rounds. And it will all have the benefit of being undeniably true.
Hogwash , he is a marvelous debater in the sense of winning or losing, and throwing his opponent off track.
You are not endowed with the abilities to descern and detect tactical and pschological cunningness, schrewdness.
AJM
Mark my words.
“She (Warren) needs a radical makeover.”
You misspelled ‘racial.’
After making a stunning Civil Rites Speech for the black shibboleths, the call came back.
“Shut up White Woman!”, they explained.
The wunder of diverskitty. Get a cat. They are smarter and more loving.
Cat vs. Loving. The Rump Court smells like Fish.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/GeraldineFerraro.jpghttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Jessica_Savitch.jpg
That reminds me of blue-eyed Ward Churchill who always wore sunglasses, even indoors.
TLDR: Her result was given in percentage form, just as with all these genetic-ancestry tests. It was 0.35%.
No. The Jerusalem Post doesn’t do anything here except to republish the Hillel number
It says 1,675 Jewish students at Harvard, or 25%. It’s in the paragraph about Yale.
Because then people will suddenly see? A giant hulking dude can claim to be a woman, engage in sports where he gets to beat the living crap out of actual women, and they do not see. Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome, and they do not see. Inner cities across America have declined and they do not see.
I submit that hoping things get really ridiculous or bad so that the people will see is a bad strategy.
Things are going to get bad whether you like it or not, how much better it is for them to get bad now than when we are weaker, after the government takes away the guns, for example. The only real reason for wanting a delay of the inevitable is concern over personal/family comfort and safety, legitimate concerns but strategically a negative.
There's some chance that Prof. Bustamante of Stanford was overly cautious and the best guess might be higher.
It could also be not a single individual occupying a single ancestor-slot 8 generations back but several lines of lesser amounts.
One scenario: Ten generations ago, 5 of her 1,024 ancestor-slots were occupied by people who carried some Amerindian, with these five averaging 71% Amerindian each. Mathematically, this would also yield the 0.35% result. Warren (b.1949)’s ten-generation ancestors would have been born around 1650 to 1710.
I don’t think there is any way to know whether it was a single individual eight generations ago, or a handful of partial-Amerindians ten generations ago, or etc.
A caveat is that at this far distance, the single-ancestor-slot idea becomes less useful conceptually as we start to not inherit from all lines anymore starting around the time in question, including only half at ten generations ago:
There is also a possible avenue of some of the 0.35% result being non-Amerindian ancestry that got picked up as so by the test, i.e. false positive, from something random in Asia that resembles Amerindian, or genes that look like it (I am thinking of the common case of 23andMe implausibly assigning 0.1% Yakut to Whites). It necessarily cannot be a 100%-precise science, of course.
Your political point is definitely correct.
I wanted to add the 0.35% figure, her actual result. This figure did not appear in the Boston Globe article. They instead presented it with the (perhaps) not-so-helpful concept of generation estimates with a very, very wide margin of error (6 to 10).
Thanks. What do you mean though that it is a misdirection?
Because then people will suddenly see? A giant hulking dude can claim to be a woman, engage in sports where he gets to beat the living crap out of actual women, and they do not see. Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome, and they do not see. Inner cities across America have declined and they do not see.
I submit that hoping things get really ridiculous or bad so that the people will see is a bad strategy.
” Every socialist attempt in history has had a bad outcome”
Right on, however each new generation of socialists operates under the motto of : “They, the Ruskies, the Chinese, Cubans, East Germans, Hungarians, Poles, etc, they were the wrong ones, as they did not understand Marx and we do”, so no amount of rational discussion will get through to them as they are insane.
AJM
It says 1,675 Jewish students at Harvard, or 25%. It's in the paragraph about Yale.
Again, they specifically wrote that it’s the same number from the same source Ron used. The Hillel.org website publishes for each school both an estimated number of Jews and a percentage of Jews. Per the article, “figures are estimated by the campus Hillel [organizations]”.
All that happened here is that until the last few years, there was no independent data to compare to the (old) Harvard Hillel estimates, so the same number became the de facto “official” count that appeared in dozens of publications such as your JPost article. When alternative estimates became available, including the newer Hillel numbers, they all came up with roughly half of the old-Hillel numbers.
Are whites not dying out fast enough for pocahontas Warren? We have the highest suicide rates and deaths now exceed births is almost half of the states. Poor whites are at risk of being assaulted by blacks or Latinos, but poor non-whites have nothing to fear from whites.
These and other trends are indicators of being an oppressed people which whites are and having no political representation which arguably we don’t have.
Truly something to behold.
It's also interesting that the Chinese govt is basically practicing an explicitly racialist breeding policy.
I wonder if one day, far right Euro govts will force Muslim migrants to marry their women to White Christian males. That'd be something to see.
This is a benefit of having over a billion low empathy people in your ethnostate which also has strategic nukes. No one tells you what to do internally. It just gets done.
Remember that only white people can be racist, goy.
The interesting thing isn't that China has a shortage of marriageable-age women (due to sex-selective abortions) and an excess of bachelors. It also has a huge problem with radicalism among Muslims. So being the coldly logical and low-empathy people that they are, the Chinese govt figured that they'd kidnap Uighur women and force them to marry Han men. So this limits the proportion of future Uighur-origin children who'll grow up in Islamic households, while also decreasing the bachelor population.
Kill two birds with one stone.
What's not to like?
Perhaps China just found the dual solution to Europe's Muslim problem and the completely separate issue of unmarried incel men.
It'd be funny if someone implemented this idea.
In another ten years or so, the “Negro electorate” may well bedoing double-duty as the “Harvard Law School faculty selection and tenure committee”.
By attacking whites, a candidate appeals to both non whites and good whites who gain status by being anti white. So, it is a smart move
Remember that only white people can be racist, goy.
If Jews ran China, I guarantee you this wouldn’t be happening. China is run by Han Chinese nationalist-technocrats. While the national leadership isn’t fanatically ethnocentric, they’re pragmatic, coldly logical, and not constrained by any type of racial cuckery. So they just do whatever is in the best interest of the country, which sometimes means stepping on minority groups.
The interesting thing isn’t that China has a shortage of marriageable-age women (due to sex-selective abortions) and an excess of bachelors. It also has a huge problem with radicalism among Muslims. So being the coldly logical and low-empathy people that they are, the Chinese govt figured that they’d kidnap Uighur women and force them to marry Han men. So this limits the proportion of future Uighur-origin children who’ll grow up in Islamic households, while also decreasing the bachelor population.
Kill two birds with one stone.
What’s not to like?
Perhaps China just found the dual solution to Europe’s Muslim problem and the completely separate issue of unmarried incel men.
It’d be funny if someone implemented this idea.
Perhaps not, but it’s survival of the fittest out there. Candi
Even if a candidate doesn’t do it there are plenty of people with the skills, time, and talent to do it for him. Unless it’s deep-sixed by the Facebook and Google monopolies (certainly not unlikely) it will make the rounds. And it will all have the benefit of being undeniably true.
Pale face lady want much wampum.
Elizabeth Warren isn’t really speaking to a group of black students. She’s talking to herself and her libtard supporters; telling herself what she wants to hear to assuage the angst she feels because African-Americans do not have the same standard of living as she has.
What about George Zimmerman?
Undoubtedly, Warren understands what needs to be done in order to win over the Black Party but couldn't she be a bit more subtle than that.
Plus, she left out the Miscellaneous!
Oh, yeah I forgot,"In general, though, the miscellaneous don”t much interest white people. (And blacks pay them almost no attention whatsoever.)" (Sailer, 2013)
No, she couldn’t. Warren is a humorless feminist Boomer and Trump has already made short work of her.
The steeezers hate Whiteness more than they love their own children, apparently.