The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
JANUARY DIARY: Charles Murray Good On Sex, Bad On Race; Hasidim Having Fun; ETC. (12 ITEMS)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Face fungus

In the mysterious way these things come round, it’s been a mustache month.

There was this weird story about Harry Harris, our Ambassador to South Korea. He has a mustache. He was born in Japan to a Japanese mother and American father. That’s got the South Koreans stirred up.

The gist of the criticism is that with the mustache, Harris resembles the reviled Japanese leaders who ruled the Korean Peninsula with an iron fist during the Japanese occupation.

Some of Japan’s most prominent wartime leaders—like Hideki Tojo, the Prime Minister who was later executed by a postwar tribunal, and Emperor Hirohito—had mustaches.

O-kay. Given that we have committed our troops—28,000 of them last time I looked—to defending South Korea against an adversary with one-half the South’s population and one-fiftieth its GDP, I think we should tell the Sorks where to stick their criticism.

And then of course, John Bolton was in the news. In my January 31st Radio Derb I did my best to extend some charity towards Bolton, but the temptation to make fun of his extraordinary face fungus proved irresistible:

Still, I’m sure a case can be made for him. No doubt he’s a good husband and father, kind to small animals. Heck, I bet he’s a jolly companion down at the pub over pints of ale, with a fund of witty anecdotes to charm and amuse you as you try not to watch him suck the ale-froth from his mustache. [At 4m58s here.]

And then, in an idle hour I was browsing in Bryan Ward-Perkins 2005 book The Fall of Rome, which sets out to debunk the revisionist “late antiquity” thesis of, amongst others, Peter Brown.

Brown et al. have argued that the end of the Roman Empire was no big deal and the years ad 250-800 in Europe—that’s “late antiquity”—were buzzing with cultural development and vibrant intellectual ferment. Au contraire, argues Ward-Perkins, the fall of Rome really was a horrible catastrophe and the Dark Ages really were pretty damn dark.

Well, along the way there Ward-Perkins gives us a fascinating three-page digression on mustaches. The Romans, he says, just didn’t have them.

There is no representation that I know of, from any century, that shows a Roman, or indeed a Greek, with a moustache (unless it is accompanied by a beard); and there is not even a word in the Latin language for “moustache.”

Really? I checked with my Cassell’s Latin Dictionary.

moustache, render by the phrase labrum superius non radere, not to shave the upper lip (Caes.)

There were mustaches around in the period under question, but they were a mark of German-ness. Theodoric the Ostrogoth had a mustache: Ward-Perkins shows him mustached on a gold medallion of the period. His successor Theodahad likewise. It was a Germanic thing, an ethnic marker.

(I have used the American spelling there except when copying from British authors. The pronunciations are different, too: “MUS-tash” in America, “mus-TOSH” in the Old Country.)

Name that virus

One side effect of the news about corona virus has been on sales of Corona beer. Apparently large numbers of people think the virus is caught from drinking the beer. Prophesy what you like about Artificial Intelligence; I doubt it will ever be a match for Natural Stupidity.

At least one wag has suggested that there’s a business opportunity here for virologists:

Whoever names the next virus should blackmail valuable brands into not naming [it] after them and use funds to finance a cure.

For a Brit of my vintage, Corona is neither a beer nor a virus. It is, and forever will be, a brand of pop (=soda) sold in Britain way back around 1950, sealed with a complicated wire-and-plug arrangement. I can still taste their dandelion and burdocksigh›.

Scruton

Conservative intellectual Sir Roger Scruton left us this month. I posted a very brief (because I knew him only very slightly) tribute at VDARE.com.

Of other tributes, the most luminous I have read came from Jonathan Price in First Things. Price did know Sir Roger well:

Sir Roger was my teacher, mentor, and friend. For a decade, beginning in 2010 and ending only when he became ill, I attended his gatherings of young philosophers: twice-termly symposia in his rooms in Oxford or his apartment in London. One of us would present a paper, and then Roger and the others would criticize it, assisted by bottles of vintage French wine. He called us his “Refugees”: a collection of misfits in modern philosophy departments; lovers of culture, place, history, beauty, and time; lost in late modernity. [Remembering Sir Roger by Jonathan Price; First Things, January 17th 2020.]

“Misfits”? I should say. How on earth did they evade the attentions of the Thought Police? Well, Scruton himself didn’t.

I have only one other personal recollection of Sir Roger, and it is as inconsequential as it could possibly be.

During a brief spell of prosperity in mid-1980s London I patronized a good West End tailor. Among the items he made for me was a sports jacket in a rather loud tweed.

(“Sports” in this context means shooting sports. A loud jacket reduced your chances of being shot in error, like the unfortunate beater in that James Mason movie.)

On one of the occasions I was in the same room with Sir Roger Scruton, he was wearing a sports jacket identical with mine. Did we share the same London tailor? I thought it would be impertinent to ask. Too late now.

Hasidim having fun

I still don’t have the Jew Thing, so I guess I’ll have to go on putting up with emails from people sneering at me for my cowardly refusal to Name The Jew.

The Jew Thing and issues arising from it—the quantification of the Holocaust, the influence of Jewish and Israeli lobbies on our politics—are fascinating to (a) Jews and (b) antisemites. To those of us who are neither thing, they are not very interesting. The Holocaust was a terrible thing that happened in history, which is full of terrible things. AIPAC and their friends are a nuisance; but given our constitutional protections for lobbying, I don’t see what can be done about it.

My attitude, if I’m obliged to have one, is fundamentally Darwinian. As I have written: If it’s really true that 97 percent of the U.S. population is dancing to the tune of the other three percent, the more fool they. People who tell me this are just practicing another kind of victimology: “Poor us! We have no agency! …” The hell with that. Stop dancing.

Occasionally, though, my attention dwells for an hour or so on some aspect of Jewishness. So it was early this month when the Mrs and I watched that 1992 Melanie Griffith movie A Stranger Among Us, in which a New York City cop investigates a murder among the Hasidim. Yes, yes, I know: The Hasidim are no more representative of Jews at large than the Amish are of Swiss-Germans, and a lot of their fellow Jews don’t like them. They are an aspect of Jewishness, OK?

We came away from the movie with the impression that being Hasidic is a lot of fun. Dancing, singing, fellowship … hey. It’s only a movie, of course, and not one well-regarded by the critics, but there’s food for thought there.

ORDER IT NOW

I dimly remember a straight-journalism article about New York Hasidim by some social scientist, in one of the magazines (New Yorker?) thirty-odd years ago, telling us inter alia that Hasidic women enjoy unusually high levels of sexual satisfaction. Watching A Stranger Among Us, it’s not hard to believe.

Bolt-hole news

I’ve been speculating for years — more than ten years—that Uruguay might be just the place as a bolt-hole to flee to if things go pear-shaped in the Northern Hemisphere.

Perhaps I should have kept quiet. Uruguay had a presidential election in November. The winner, who takes office March 1st, was Luis Lacalle Pou, who is tagged as “center-right” in reports I’ve read. My knowledge of Uruguayan politics is neither deep nor wide, although I did have a soft spot for old lefty José Mujica, a sort of honest version of Bernie Sanders, who was president from 2010 to 2015.

All through his public career Mujica has lived very frugally. Elected president, he would not move to the presidential palace, preferring to stay on the small farm he runs with his wife, who he seems to have lived with for ever. As president, he continued driving his beaten-up 1987 Volkswagen beetle, and donated most of his salary to left-wing charities. [Radio Derb, 8/24/2018.]

This new chap doesn’t seem to be in the Mujica league for personal character, but he has decided the country needs more people … of the right kind. He wants to loosen up residency requirements so that persons who buy $500,000-worth of real estate and live in the country for 90 days will get permanent residence.

I predict an incoming flood of Chinese. But hey, at least Lacalle Pou isn’t so godawful barking stupid as to propose mass settlement of Somalis.

That msn.com story I linked to, by the way, fortifies my bolt-hole argument.

Uruguay has a lot to sell. Nestled between Argentina and Brazil, it’s one of South America’s wealthiest nations. The coast is lined with stunning beaches, the countryside dotted with picturesque farms and vineyards.

(For those who like trivia questions: I’m pretty sure that of all the nations on Earth, Uruguay has the southernmost northernmost point. If you say this, someone will try to counter with New Zealand; but New Zealand owns some remote islands that are further north than northernmost Uruguay. Quick now: Which nation has the northernmost southernmost point?)

The sex recession

With the turn of the decade, people are coming forth with predictions. Psychologist James Thompson’s over at Unz Review are the most minimalist I have so far seen:

  1. Very few people will be using flying taxis, other than those already using conventional flying taxis.
  2. Very few people will be being driven by autonomous vehicles.
  3. Most cars will be powered by internal combustion engines.
  4. Batteries will be only a little better than they are at the moment.
  5. People all over the world will be richer and healthier.
  6. Population growth will stabilize, except in Africa.

In particular zones of interest, geneticists Razib Khan and Spencer Wells offer Top 10 human genetics & evolution predictions for the 2020s. Number Ten snagged my attention.

There will be “dating apps” or “match-making” apps that use DNA.

Perhaps that will do something to turn around the “Sex Recession” I’ve been reading about for at least a year, since The Atlantic coined that phrase in a December 2018 article.

Here was another piece about this, in the New York Post.

According to the latest data by the General Social Survey, men between the ages of 18 and 29 are having less sex than ever; the number of abstinent men has nearly tripled in the last decade, from 10 percent in 2008 to 28 percent last year. [Why today’s young men are terrified of sex, by Eric Spitznagel; New York Post, January 11 2020.]

The paradox here is the one I nailed (sorry …) on Radio Derb five years ago:

Human beings today are much more sexually attractive than they used to be, thanks to much improved standards of health, hygiene, and grooming; but this seems not to have led to any actual increase in coitus.

A hundred years ago there was no Brazilian waxing, most people got enough hot water to bathe in only once a week or less, skin diseases were rampant, and there was no proper detergent to get clothes clean: yet not the fitchew nor the soiléd horse went to’t with a more riotous appetite than our hairy, dirty, smelly, pimply forebears. [Fifty shades of paradox; Radio Derb, February 14th 2015.]

Perhaps we could ask the Hasidim about it.

Power of the word

In the matter of Human Biodiversity (HBD), the event of the month was the January 28th publication of Charles Murray’s new book Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class. My review is here, Steve Sailer’s is here.

Content aside, Human Diversity offers an interesting take on some of our current denominative neuroses.

I winced at that “gender” in the title. What’s wrong with “sex”? Sure, the social-justice language police don’t like it, but that’s all the more reason to favor it.

Murray trots along amiably for a few pages using “gender” in the approved fashion. Then, on page 19, he turns Derbish.

From now on I will usually refer to “sex differences” instead of “gender differences.” “Gender” was popularized in the 1960s to designate socially constructed differences. But it turns out that there is no clear division between biological and socially constructed differences and no point in trying to pretend otherwise—which is what the widespread use of “gender” amounts to. In the technical literature, many scholars who write on these topics have resumed the use of “sex” to apply to all kinds of differences between males and females. So do I.

Yess-ss-ss! Murray doesn’t hold the line as tightly as I’d like: The word “gender” subsequently occurs a hundred-odd times in his book. A high proportion of those occurrences, though, are in quotes from other writers, or the titles of referenced articles, or the names of things like the UN’s Gender Development Index. Murray’s heart is definitely in the right place.

He let me down on “race,” though.

The combination of historical and scientific reasons makes a compelling case that the word race has outlived its usefulness when discussing genetics. That’s why I adopt contemporary practice in the technical literature, which uses ancestral population or simply population instead of race or ethnicity, throughout the rest of Part II. [Page 135.]

That follows 200 words of argument making the case for dropping “race.” It’s not a bad case, but there is a real loss to the language here. “Population”? My town has a population, but we are not a race. You’ve just collapsed two distinct meanings into one word. “Ancestral population”? Trading in one syllable for seven? That’s the kind of thing that bureaucrats and crooked lawyers like to do to make it harder for us to think.

Sorry, but I am going to go on using “race” to mean what I have always supposed it meant: a localized, mostly-inbred old population.

Where taboo words survive

While I’m grumbling about word fashions, I may as well add this one.

ORDER IT NOW

My January 31st Radio Derb included an item [at 32m33s here] about SOAS, the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, of which I nurse fond memories from forty years ago. The place has, of course, gone to the dogs, like a great deal of academia in Britain.

A listener wondered why they are allowed to go on using the word “oriental” in their name. He had been told by some member of the Voluntary Auxiliary Thought Police that “oriental” is an offensive word.

Yes, I’ve been told that, too. The taboo goes way back. When I published a novel about Chinese people back in 1996, one reviewer scolded me for using it.

For the names of longstanding institutions, there seems to be some exception to the taboo rules allowed. We still have the United Negro College Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, although both just identify themselves by their initials wherever possible. Who today would dare to say “Negro” or “colored” in any context other than those organization names?

The naming of parts

The things that come up in idle conversation! Sitting around with two gents of my own generation the other day, the following question was posed: “How did your father refer to his penis?” My own sire—born 1899 in Lancashire, England—called his “my old man.”

There seems to be a universal tendency to identify our most intimate parts with the senior demographic, I suppose because both the parts and the demographic tend to be … wrinkly. Followers of the philosopher Schopenhauer know that the Latin word anus means “old woman.”

There are puzzles within puzzles, though. I have a Chinese friend who, as a teenager during the Cultural Revolution, was sent down to the countryside. He once told me that a male Chinese peasant refers to his organ of generation as lao er, “old number two.”

Me: “If that’s number two, what’s number one?”

He: “I dunno. His head, I guess.”

I guess so.

TV is for geezers

Browsing idly on the internet I saw someone saying: “Americans under thirty don’t watch TV.” I didn’t think about it at the time and didn’t bookmark it, but it lodged in my head somehow and kept coming back.

At last I thought I’d check it out. We have a 24-year-old living at home with us, so I tackled him. Does he watch TV?

He: Nah, not really.

Me: Come on. I’ve seen you watching TV.

He: Eh. When I’ve got nothing to do and there’s a movie on, I’ll watch the movie. That’s about it.

Me: Sitcoms? Current affairs? Late night comics? News programs? Sports?

He: Nah.

All right, that’s what quantitative social scientists call an N=1 study. I have no grounds for claiming that Junior is a typical American twentysomething.

He’s smart and well-socialized though, with four years in the military, now two and a half further years studying business at a respectable university, getting decent grades. (Thank you, GI Bill!) I don’t see him as a behavioral outlier in any way. He spends more time than I’d like playing computer games, but he doesn’t let it get in the way of his studies, and spends plenty of his free time out of the house with friends.

Asking around among other parents, I believe it’s true. We’re losing TV.

This is one of those social changes that sneak up on you. I’ve been taking TV for granted all these years. Now it’s slipping away. I only just found out.

Muh Latin

I was throwing some Latin around back there. Last month I regretted not having paid more attention to Latin in school. How much attention did I pay, actually? Quantify, quantify.

My school reports show me having the following rankings in a class of 33 or 34 boys for the twelve semesters of Latin I did, three semesters a year for four years, last semester not ranked:

3, 1, 1; 2, 3, 1; 1, 20, 1; 19, 6, ?

Hard to know what to make of that. Why was I absent for Spring term 1959, when I plunged to 20th in my class? I have no recollection.

Fall of that year, when I dropped to 19, looks like an attitude problem. Ah, adolescence! As we Latinists say: Intemperans adolescentia effetum corpus tradit senectuti.

Math Corner

[Note: My solution to the second part of the December brainteaser, as originally posted, was wrong. There’s a correction at the end of this link. Sorry sorry.]

On a whim, I asked Santa to bring me the American Mathematical Society page-a-day calendar for 2020. Santa accordingly did so. Now each day I can turn up some mildly-interesting math factlet.

So far, I must say, the thing is rather lame. It is of course woke as all get-out. The first actual mathematician featured, on the page for January 15th, is Sofia Kovalevskaya. Although undoubtedly a very smart lady, Kovalevskaya was not a first-rank mathematician. In Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment she is ranked 113th. But hey, she had a vagina! (Did she, as mathematical folklore suggests, grant access thither to Karl Weierstrass, a much more consequential mathematician? We shall never know; Weierstrass burned all her letters to him after she died.)

For January 13th we get a poem, or what passes for a poem nowadays—no rhyme or meter, of course. It is actually Sarah Glaz’s “13 January 2009,” which you can read for yourself about two-thirds of the way down this American Scientist web page. Sheesh, guys, if it’s mathematical verse you’re wanting, I am always available.

And then, January 16th: the hyperbolic soccer ball. Meh.

I wouldn’t say this topic is totally lame. I’ll allow that it might get a smart highschooler thinking about serious mathematical concepts like negative curvature of a two-dimensional surface. It’s lame-ish, though, especially to those of us who are soccer-phobic.

Here’s the idea. Imagine a soccer ball, or just google “soccer ball” to remind you what the thing looks like. Ignoring the curvature due to inflation, it consists of twelve regular pentagons (black) and twenty regular hexagons (white) put together in a pleasantly symmetrical way. Mathematically speaking, it’s a truncated icosahedron.

ORDER IT NOW

Here’s how you could make one. Start with one black regular pentagon and five white regular hexagons having the same edge length. Attach the hexagons to the pentagons, edge to edge. You get a nice floral figure. There is daylight between adjacent edges of adjacent hexagons, though. To get rid of the daylight, you could fold up the hexagons until the edges meet, making a shallow bowl.

If you now attach more pentagons and more hexagons in an appropriate pattern, the extended bowl closes in altogether on itself at last. You end up with a finite solid figure—a soccer ball!

For a hyperbolic soccer ball, instead of starting with a regular black pentagon, you start with a regular black heptagon (seven edges). Take seven white regular hexagons having the same edge length and attach them to the heptagon, edge to edge, just as before.

This time there is no daylight between adjacent edges of adjacent hexagons. In fact there is overlap.

This is not good. Folding up the hexagons as before doesn’t help; the overlap just gets worse.

If your model is made from some substance that bends—paper is the usual thing—you can none the less join adjacent edges of adjacent hexagons by warping the polygons. This strikes me as cheating. This in fact is where I start muttering “lame … lame …” under my breath.

You do get an object of sorts, though; and some people, although obviously not me, think it’s cool.

And then, as before, you can add more heptagons and hexagons in a mathematically suitable way, until …

Until what? Does this thing ever close up into a finite solid object? Intuition tells me that it doesn’t, although I’ve never had the patience to think the matter through rigorously.

If I’m right, the hyperbolic soccer ball is just an uneven surface stretching away to infinity in all directions. Try playing soccer with that!

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Science • Tags: Charles Murray, Political Correctness, Racism 
Hide 53 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “Quick now: Which nation has the northernmost southernmost point?”

    Iceland. The Isle of Surtsey.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surtsey

    Though I should mention Norway’s southernmost point is Bouvet Island, just above the Antarctic Circle. Winning it the most surprising geographical spread.

    The UK’s South Sandwich Islands would be the world’s southernmost southernmost point that is internationally recognized (not counting the mix of Antarctic claims).

  2. In antiquity the Celts were notably mustachioed — French (Gauls), Britons, and Spanish (Celtiberians) — and their Druid priesthood especially.

    • Replies: @anon
  3. ‘…Ward-Perkins, the fall of Rome really was a horrible catastrophe and the Dark Ages really were pretty damn dark…’

    Score that one for Ward-Perkins.

  4. ‘Quick now: Which nation has the northernmost southernmost point?)’

    Iceland?

    • Replies: @Magic Dirt Resident
  5. ‘…But hey, at least Lacalle Pou isn’t so godawful barking stupid as to propose mass settlement of Somalis…’

    …and you’re the guy who refuses to worry about the impact of excessive Jewish influence.

    • LOL: Truth
  6. Anonymous[600] • Disclaimer says:

    “Gender” was popularized in the 1960s to designate socially constructed differences.

    I’d always understood that “gender” became the PC term for “sex” in recent decades, too. But a while back I came across a WASP (Women’s Airforce Service Pilots) yearbook from 1943, which contained the lyrics to the WASP Song (in olden times, all organizations had songs, it seems).
    I append herewith. Note the use of the term “gender” rather than “sex.” Perhaps it was an accepted euphemism.

    By the way, the reference to a “PT” is to the training plane they used:

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  7. Tusk says:

    If it’s really true that 97 percent of the U.S. population is dancing to the tune of the other three percent, the more fool they.

    Stunning lack of awareness here. The same can be said for immigrants, if they can make it to the country and receive Government services then you are the fools. If Africans can acquire resources from bullrushing America en masse then American’s seemingly deserve what they get.
    The Darwinian take is simply to give up and get defeated. So I guess if Derb wants us to give up on noting Jewish anti-White animus, because if they can rule over us we should accept it, then he too should be ready to accept America being flooded with non-Whites since they are defeating historic American institutions.

    Also love this:

    the quantification of the Holocaust, the influence of Jewish and Israeli lobbies on our politics—are fascinating to (a) Jews and (b) antisemites

    Completely backwards and simply pathologizes everyone who is conscious of Jewish meddling. This also simply creates an untouchable sphere in which only Jewish people are allowed and nobody can question this. Soon questions of economy, culture, politics, will be confined to the commisars (Majority Jewish) and it will be anti-semitic to question that the Jews don’t know best for you.

    It also is a terribly ineffective position for Derb to make considering that it’s the same style of irrational argument used against him. Nobody can criticise non-whites unless you are one, and if you do you are racist. The only people who care about illegal immigration are: (a) illegal immigrants, (b) racists. Knowing that this is simply bad argument against your ‘patriotism’ why would you deploy the same argument against those who question Jews? Seems cognitively dissonant to me.

    Perhaps someone should draw a venn diagram between “anti-semite” positions and Derb’s positions. I’m sure there would be a lot of overlap.

  8. utu says:

    “AIPAC and their friends are a nuisance; but given our constitutional protections for lobbying, I don’t see what can be done about it. “ – There is no constitutional protection for foreign agents. RFK while at DOJ during JFK presidency was working hard to prevent the creation of AIPAC. Then LBJ let him go and AIPAC soon was legalized.

    • Replies: @songbird
  9. utu says:

    ” We came away from the movie with the impression that being Hasidic is a lot of fun. “ – For more fun and sexual satisfaction try Israeli film “Kadosh.”

  10. Anonymous[255] • Disclaimer says:

    >>……and it will be anti-semitic to question that the Jews don’t know best for you.

    This is already the case with immigration. For many Jews, opposing immigration = antisemitism. Why? Doesn’t matter, it is just so. And Derbyshire knows this. He’s friends with Peter Brimelow. Brimelow has commented on how former colleagues – Jewish – have given him the cold shoulder since he started banging the drum about the monumental disaster that is our immigration policy. Brimelow has never uttered as much as an unkind word towards Jews, yet they construe his advocacy to end immigraiton as deeply anti-semitic.

    Other policy that Jews construe as anti-semitic: reigning in and controlling Wall Street, ending it’s priveleges; auditing the fed; suggesting that Russia is not our enemy; real environmental conservation, not the phony blather about global warming; regulating abortion. There are more. And it all makes sense. Any policy, act, utterance that discomfits a Jew is by defintion, anti-semitic, in the minds of a Jews. Weird, but we have to live with this. Derbyshire knows all this.

    • Agree: Malcolm X-Lax
  11. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:

    “O-kay. Given that we have committed our troops—28,000 of them last time I looked—to defending South Korea against an adversary with one-half the South’s population and one-fiftieth its GDP, I think we should tell the Sorks where to stick their criticism.”

    Another example of Mr. Derbyshire’s clueless fealty to his adopted Uncle Sam. (The hyperlinked article was written by “Mr. Paleoconservative.” Ten years ago.) How about “we” show the ingrate Sorks who’s boss, and just leave?

  12. swamped says:

    “I still don’t have the Jew Thing, so I guess I’ll have to”…start a separate section for these musty musings rather than include it under the heading of Name That Virus.
    “The Jew Thing and issues arising from it—the quantification of the Holocaust, the influence of Jewish and Israeli lobbies on our politics—are fascinating to (a) Jews and (b) antisemites. To those of us who are neither thing”…the ‘Deal of The Century’ probably really does seem like the deal of the century.
    “AIPAC and their friends are a nuisance; but given our constitutional protections for lobbying, I don’t see what can be done about it”…after all, they don’t occupy Long Island (yet) so why give a shit? And, hey, if “the Derb” (that suave Hipster) can put up with the nuisance, why can’t Palestinians & American taxpayers? Palestinians, after all, are just “practicing another kind of victimology: ‘Poor us! We have no agency! …’ The hell with that. Stop dancing”…you fools! just stop dancing when the (so cool) Derb’s zionazi soulmates start shooting their American weapons at you; after all, military Occupation is just “a nuisance” so chill, you vile anti-semites! But then the always debonair ‘Derb’ never did seem to be in the Jose Mujica league for personal character.
    Mujica had a little stronger word than nuisance for some of Israel’s behavior in Gaza, calling it “genocide”. Making him too no doubt, an ‘anti-semite’ to the Turd, err…Derb.

    • Replies: @36 ulster
  13. BuelahMan says:

    Poor Derb. Usually good stuff tainted by the jew defense.

  14. dearieme says:

    We buy the wonderful “dandelion and burdock” as a cordial, pour it over ice, and mix it with fizzy water. Since Messrs Tesco will sell us the latter at about 20 cents for two litres we get an excellent and cheap summer drink.

  15. Heymrguda says:

    I linked to the NY post article about young men afraid of having sex, thinking it was about the effects of the “me too” movement. Instead it was about these guys afraid of not being able to “perform” for aggressive females
    At the bottom of the article was another about a guy whose life was ruined after his name was posted to a list of males in journalism, supposedly guilty of sex transgressions against women. He was unaware of what these offenses were and who posted the accusations.
    Either somebody is lying or exaggerating, or something does not make sense here. You read about young women whose sexual aggression seems close to rape, then about another who is traumatized because some guy touched here rear end.
    We truly live in a bizarro world.

  16. I met Sir Roger once, too, just for a minute at a party. It was before my long deep slide into red-pilliness and I had never heard of him, although I figured it out later with the help of Google and Wikipedia. I think I even called him “Mr. Scruton.” Oh well, he seemed like such a nice man.

  17. Stan says:

    Ryan Dawson has revealing interview on the Jewish power.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/TnZ8avGbQn2I/

  18. @Anonymous

    Note the use of the term “gender” rather than “sex.” Perhaps it was an accepted euphemism.

    Or perhaps it was easier to rhyme it with “tender” than to find something to rhyme with “sex.”

    Or perhaps both.

  19. songbird says:
    @utu

    Why did Sirhan Sirhan kill RFK, unless he was really a supporter of Israel?

    • Replies: @utu
  20. The part about the Romans is just plain wrong. Unbelievable historical idiocy is the call and watchword of this website, noteworthily of the current author.

    My proof? In controvertible. Take a look at the relief engravings encircling Trajan’s column. It’s full of legionaries with facial hair.

  21. Re Korea:

    I think we should tell the Sorks where to stick their criticism.

    I think we should tell them that our soldiers have been there for 67 years since the truce, and they are just so tired of being there, and they are too old now to care about shaving their mustaches, much less wear underwear*, so …

    .

    * Listen to the song, and you’ll understand.

  22. Poor fellow, beaten up so much he has lost any coherence.

    Karma for all those years at National Reivew.

  23. Acilius says: • Website

    ‘Followers of the philosopher Schopenhauer know that the Latin word anus means “old woman.”’

    There is indeed a Latin word ‘anus’ that means ‘old woman.’ It is pronounced with a short /a/. There is another word, spelled the same but pronounced with a long /a/, that means ‘ring’ or ‘anus.’

    Schopenhauer could raise a giggle by making a pun on these words, though a Roman probably would not have been able to do so. Not only was the distinction between long and short vowels a robust one in spoken Latin, but there are other differences between the words that would have been prominent in a Roman’s mind. For one thing, ‘anus’ meaning ‘old woman’ is grammatically feminine, so a ‘good old woman’ would be a ‘bona anus.’ On the other hand, ‘ānus’ meaning ‘ring’ or ‘anus’ is masculine, so a ‘good ring’ or a ‘good anus’ would be a ‘bonus ānus.’

    What’s more, the words are ‘anus’ and ‘ānus’ only when they are subjects of conjugated verbs. If they are being used in any other way, they take case endings other than /s/. ‘Anus’ meaning ‘old woman’ is fourth declension; that means that you form it by adding case endings to a stem ending in /u/. ‘Ānus’ meaning ‘ring’ or ‘anus’ is second declension; that means you form it by adding case endings to a stem ending in /o/. For example, ‘of an old woman’ is ‘anūs,’ while ‘of a ring’ or ‘of an anus’ is ‘ani’ (in archaic Latin, ‘anoi.’)

  24. @Tusk

    Excellent points. The fundamental problem is the shabbos goy dilemma.

    By Darwinian he actually means chutzpah and ethnic nepotism plus goyim fetters like political correctness, so-called hate speech laws, general censorship etc.

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2007/11/jewish-advantage.html

  25. utu says:
    @songbird

    “Why did Sirhan Sirhan kill RFK, unless he was really a supporter of Israel?” – I did not know you are (((you))).

    • Replies: @songbird
  26. AaronB says:

    Hasids are actually a ton of fun, its true. They have a very mystical take on Judaism and emphasize joy and celebration. They even like to drink alcohol during celebrations.

    They have been a huge influence on mainstream orthodox Judaism, and are not a marginal sect like the Amish. They’re big in Israel too and not so religious Jews are influenced by them.

    I think one of the reasons Judaism continues to flourish is because Hasidism started emphasizing things like joy, emotion, celebration, etc, and not just dry legalism and ritual. Judaism became fun again.

    While protestant Christianity got stuck on sin, evil, the need for hard work, doing ones grim duty – it got dull and people didn’t like it anymore.

  27. songbird says:
    @utu

    I’ll give Ted points for opposing the Iraq War, though he was generally a scoundrel. (and may have wanted Iran as the target)

    According to one tally, Ted Kennedy voted 100 percent in concert with positions taken by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee/He rebuked the George H. W. Bush administration when it stopped loan guarantees with Israeli given the Israeli settlement issue. He also opposed dividing Jerusalem up in a peace deal/Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Kennedy, “a great friend of Israel…”/”Kennedy was clearly a friend of Israel all the way, and in every place that he could help us he did,” said Israeli President Shimon Peres

    But you are saying the other brothers were different. Color me skeptical.

    • Replies: @utu
  28. Au contraire, argues Ward-Perkins, the fall of Rome really was a horrible catastrophe

    Maybe we can compromise and say Fomenko was right.

  29. utu says:
    @songbird

    He was not a slow learner. So initially he wanted to bail out form politics and self-destruct. He did not want to be taken seriously to reduce the target cross-section.

    https://www.gq.com/story/kennedy-ted-senator-profile
    In April 1969, flying back from a congressional trip to inspect the living conditions of poor Indians in Alaska, a hard-drinking Kennedy pelted aides and reporters with pillows, ranged up and down the aisles chanting “Es-ki-mo power” and rambled incoherently about Bobby’s assassination, saying, “They’re going to shoot my ass off the way they shot Bobby…”

    Three months later, on July 18, came the defining moment of Kennedy’s life, when he drove his Oldsmobile off a bridge on the island of Chappaquiddick, sending young Kennedy staffer Mary Jo Kopechne to her death and drowning his chances of ever getting to the White House.

  30. My attitude, if I’m obliged to have one, is fundamentally Darwinian. As I have written: If it’s really true that 97 percent of the U.S. population is dancing to the tune of the other three percent, the more fool they. People who tell me this are just practicing another kind of victimology: “Poor us! We have no agency! …” The hell with that. Stop dancing.

    (1) Why would anyone be a Darwininian?

    (2) What has the curbing of free discussion of historical events to do with Darwinism?

  31. If it’s really true that 97 percent of the U.S. population is dancing to the tune of the other three percent, the more fool they. People who tell me this are just practicing another kind of victimology: “Poor us! We have no agency! …” The hell with that. Stop dancing.

    I’ll know we have stopped dancing when you are the race correspondent for the New York Times and Steve Sailer provides the same service for the Washington Post. Please stop and think about the battles that would have to be fought and won before that could happen; and who would oppose it, with accusations of anti-semitism, racism, and hatred at every turn, combined with loss of livelihood, and sometimes violent assault.

    Jewish contributions to science, technology and business have given America a huge advantage over other countries; can anyone point to any similar advantage that has been conferred by Jewish participation in politics and the media?

  32. Dumbo says:

    Followers of the philosopher Schopenhauer know that the Latin word anus means “old woman.”

    On the other hand, the more I read about Schopenhauer’s life, the more he seems an asshole. Great philosopher, not very great human being (although his pessimist philosophy is likely a result of his character, and not the other way around).

    being Hasidic is a lot of fun

    Life can be fun when you don’t need to work and can live on welfare.

    Hasidic women enjoy unusually high levels of sexual satisfaction.

    All those babies are not going to make themselves.

    I predict an incoming flood of Chinese [to Uruguay].

    I think it’s more likely an influx of Israelis, given that they already seem to own half of Patagonia.

    Conservative intellectual Sir Roger Scruton left us this month

    RIP. He was a better writer and thinker than Derb, whose strength seems to lie in mathematics.

  33. The Jew Thing and issues arising from it—the quantification of the Holocaust, the influence of Jewish and Israeli lobbies on our politics—are fascinating to (a) Jews and (b) antisemites.

    Would you place Ron Unz under (a) or (b)?

    P.S. in my previous comment, a typo produced ‘Darwininian’ instead of ‘Darwinian’.

  34. Anonymous[545] • Disclaimer says:

    The Jew Thing and issues arising from it—the quantification of the Holocaust, the influence of Jewish and Israeli lobbies on our politics—are fascinating to (a) Jews and (b) antisemites. To those of us who are neither thing, they are not very interesting. The Holocaust was a terrible thing that happened in history, which is full of terrible things. AIPAC and their friends are a nuisance; but given our constitutional protections for lobbying, I don’t see what can be done about it.

    My attitude, if I’m obliged to have one, is fundamentally Darwinian. As I have written: If it’s really true that 97 percent of the U.S. population is dancing to the tune of the other three percent, the more fool they. People who tell me this are just practicing another kind of victimology: “Poor us! We have no agency! …” The hell with that. Stop dancing.

    Let me get this straight: the dancing goyim shouldn’t inform each-other about the source of the hidden dancing strings because that’s victimology

    …but that’s also why they should remain victims since real, Darwinian, non-victims would have just spontaneously stopped dancing without resorting to such victimological methods as communication.

    Oh, man, this is some top-shelf Hasbara material you got there, John.

    • Agree: Malcolm X-Lax
  35. anon[109] • Disclaimer says:
    @J. Alfred Powell

    Women in ancient times and more recently in Persia used a paste of honey to depilitate the nether regions. Sorry no visual evidence to support. But regarding mustaches here is a famous one,

  36. My school reports show me having the following rankings in a class of 33 or 34 boys for the twelve semesters of Latin I did, three semesters a year for four years, last semester not ranked:

    3, 1, 1; 2, 3, 1; 1, 20, 1; 19, 6, ?

    Those are some damn good rankings and he played it off like he really wasn’t into it. In an attempt to take some potshots (out of envy knowing I would’ve ranked somewhere in the 30’s) I googled Northampton School. Damn, very impressive, with quite a few scientist Fellows of the Royal Society, Members of Parliament, generals, bishops, Nobel Laureate Francis Crick, et al. You go Derb! 👊🏻

  37. @Tusk

    I didn’t used to have that “Jewish thing” either. But like they say, once you see it, you can’t unsee it. I see it even in the hypocrisy of my former childhood best friend, who laughs at my anxiety and calls me racist because I’m anxious and opposed to Europe and America being subsumed by third-world immigration but at the same time is outspokenly racist against Arabs and defends every racist policy of jews and israel, a place he’s never been. His jewish father was a louse and asshole who abandoned him and his siblings while his Swedish-born mother devoted herself to them and worked herself to death caring for him, yet it’s his father’s identity he adopts and defends while shitting on his mother’s. I can still remember him as a kid saying stuff like, “Jews have big dicks” and “the israeli military is the best in the world” etc. It meant nothing to me when I was 12 years old but now I know he got that all from his father.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  38. @Malcolm X-Lax

    Your friend has his stereotypes mixed up. Saying “Jews have big dicks” is like saying “Blacks control the banks” (and I say this as, to the best of my knowledge, a full-blooded Ashkenazi Jew).

    Also, Jews who take their tribe seriously wouldn’t consider your friend a member if his mother wasn’t Jewish.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
  39. @Rex Little

    His father came from a very ethnocentric family of ashkenazi jews. In fact, I can recall going to his college graduation some 30 years ago and at the after-party his aunt telling the story (which I had heard several times before) of their grandfather (my friend’s great-grandfather) who was supposedly killed in a pogrom in kiev in 1905. It included poignant details such as how his great grandfather put on his military uniform and medals in the hope the cossacks would see his military service under the Czar and leave them alone. But…they shot him anyway. So I can most certainly affirm that there are many jews who may not be regarded as “jewish” according to the ancient rules of whatever, but who still think of themselves in ethnic terms and most definitely act themselves as jews, even if their mothers aren’t jewish.

  40. MEH 0910 says:

  41. Sean says:

    Human beings today are much more sexually attractive than they used to be, thanks to much improved standards of health, hygiene, and grooming; but this seems not to have led to any actual increase in coitus.

    A hundred years ago there was no …. tanning. For 100 years the female role in sex has been becoming less and less hesitant acquiescence. James Watson suggested a link between skin colour and libido in 2000. Incels are a thing, but I don’t know that young women are having less sex than previous generations. White women thought plain can now easily go outside their group and be seen as desirable. Female sexual promiscuity is increasing (one in eight 17-24 year old women in Britain have had sex with at least ten different partners).

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  42. Anon[418] • Disclaimer says:

    About watching TV. I get the impression that blacks watch far more (network) TV than whites, which is why they are so grossly overrepresented in both the shows and the commercials.

  43. @Tusk

    Jews, like many other groups, have lobbies and activists who represent an explicitly Jewish take on a variety of issues. Why should this be of no concern to partisans of those issues, particularly where the lobbies are so effective and the donations so large? In effect Derbyshire says to ignore sociology.

    — except when it comes to blacks (who have much less power to hurt him.) Where blacks are concerned it’s black-crime-rate all day long.

    I don’t blame JD for ducking a fight with Mike Tyson, but let’s not make things worse with dishonesty.

  44. @Sean

    I don’t know that young women are having less sex than previous generations.

    There are exceptions, but in general women can get all the sex they want, while men want all the sex they can get. I think this has been true throughout human history; the difference now (as you note) is the steady increase in how much women want.

  45. “Americans under thirty don’t watch TV.”

    That may account for the reason why most of the ads seem to hawk medications and drugs meant for, uh, “seniors.” I’ve made it a point not to have the tv on during dinner because these ads always mention the side effects–which usually consist of nausea, diarrhea and vomiting.” Just what I want to hear just as I’m about to chomp down on a pork chop.

  46. David says:

    Mr Derbyshire, I watched “Ip Man 4” last night. Its message was clearly that Chinese are better off remaining in China, not migrating to the US. The reasons presented seem mostly absurd to me, but I sure appreciate the message.

    The movie features your theme of the cold civil war among whites, where the good whites celebrate the destruction of the bad whites. US immigration enforcement officers wear Nazi uniforms, almost. There’s a bold and good natured black man who really appreciates Chinese culture. No white characters do. The black guy is sometimes painted especially black, which is weird.

    The movie even has a wicked Becky called “Becky.” And Bruce Lee is vindicated of Once Upon a Time’s slanderous defamation.

    I doubt you’d take it up, but just in case, I think your reflections on Ip Man’s nationalist message and how you think it’s perceived in China would make an interesting column.

    Little things, like why is everything pastel green, might help you explain China to us.

    It’s not what I’d call a good movie, but it’s intriguing in its foreignness.

  47. MEH 0910 says:

    Momentarily trending on Twitter:

    https://twitter.com/search?q=Eugenics&src=tren

    Thread:

    Also:

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  48. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    Yesterday, hbd chick Retweeted:

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    , @MEH 0910
  49. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    hbd chick Retweeted:

  50. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS