Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

Monthly Archives: June 2012

On watering your neighbour’s garden

You wake up every morning, and all you see is chaos and decay. Leftism is rampant. The Third World invasion proceeds one mug at a time, sexual deviants poison the culture, crazy ideologues indoctrinate the children, evil bureaucrats destroy the economy. It’s getting worse every day.

But you don’t fear. Why? Because liberals aren’t having children! Conservatives outbreed them. Pious, religious, salt of the earth people are having babies in resilient rural communities, unlike those urban hedonist pricks. The future is of those who show up for it. Our time will come!

I’ve heard this argument almost a thousand times. I guess there’s something to it. But not much.

People should really read more history. Think of society in historical terms. History is about why we are here, what happened that made us like we are. Well what about liberals. Where do they come from? If conservatives  are going to inherit the earth because they have more babies than liberals, it follows that conservatives come from conservatives, and liberals come from liberals. But 1000 years ago there were no liberals. And as you can’t create something out of nothing, it follows that liberals don’t come from liberals.

No, dear. Liberals don’t come from liberals’ babies. They come from yours.

See this committed White Nationalist mother, with her two beautiful blonde twins. Keeping the bloodline alive. Fighting dysgenics and race replacement. Not only biologically but also fighting for the race. The mother put the then 11 year old kids in a neonazi band, where they sung for the Aryan race. They had these cute things to say:

Adolf Hitler was a great man who was only trying to preserve his own race in his own country,’ Lamb said at the time.

The young teen Lynx added: ‘Lots of things were exaggerated about the Second World War. We don’t believe that 6million Jews were executed. I mean, there were not even that many Jews alive then.

‘We know there were concentration camps but they had swimming pools and tennis courts – that’s not how you would treat people if you were getting ready to kill them.’

In 2005, they donated money to victims of Hurricane Katrina but insisted it go to whites only.

Why would anyone ask about the Holocaust to 12 year old girls beats me, but hey, her mother had them well educated. Alas, you can be possessed by Hitler’s spirit itself, but the Left will still be stronger then you. Hell, they actually killed the guy 67 years ago. That should tell you something.

Girls grow up, and do what girls do. In 2012 that means…

Pot>Hitler

Long story short, the girls grew up, went to high school, got sick, didn’t like the pain, the doctor thought it swell to give the girls some pot to feel better. Of course the girls grew to like very much their weed, and it has made them feel so much better than they were ever were in the first place.

‘We just want to come from a place of love and light,’ Lamb said, adding, ‘I think we’re meant to do something more – we’re healers. We just want to exert the most love and positivity we can.’

Love and light! Poor mother. She spent every day during 15 years to teach their children to love their race, their heritage, their Führer. She socialised them in the nazi cult so they would inherit her values. Then some liberal doctor comes over, gives them drugs, and instantaneously the girls are all about “love and light”. Wanna bet about how long it takes for them to get a fancy black boyfriend?

So rightists are going to inherit the earth with the bellies of their women? Keep them coming, the Left says. Do have more kids. We’ll take them away from you.

 

 

Advertisements

Fifty shades of brown

There have been many theories about what the Arab Spring is all about. Of course the MSM say it’s about “youth committed to democracy” or some nonsense of the like. I don’t remember who was it who said it was the first of many food riots to come to the Middle East, whose non oil producers today can barely feed their huge populations.

That makes more sense, but I have another, perhaps complementary explanation. The Arab Spring, and its primary manifestation, i.e. huge demonstrations of idle youth in urban squares, is a means to get laid with white ladies. Don’t believe me?

Read this: British journalist raped at Tahrir Square. Again! I thought after Lara Logan got assaulted, and actually got it to be reported, white women would’ve got the message. It’s incredible how Lara Logan or Charlize Theron, Afrikaners who know first hand what is to be a powerless white in a non white country, would still be so deluded as to keep hanging out with their enemies. But I guess it’s never enough until you get murdered.

To the point, every time that people gang up at Tahrir Square for whatever reason, several young white women go there to report, and get raped. So why not go? Of course if you stay at the square too long the army would come cracking down, so you have to get the timing right. Every 6 months or so is enough. And the white chicks keep coming! That’s more sex than your average Arab gets normally. So no shit that the political situation is unstable. Boys just wanna have fun.

The fragility of logic

There’s a funny paradox in all us reactionary bloggers. On one hand we believe that politics should be abolished. That a firm, inviolable power structure would make life safer, the economy wealthier, the people happier overall. With caveats of course, but surely the modern glorification of constant struggle, the micro civil war that democracy forces upon all of us is a bad thing.

Yet we are obsessed with politics. Writing a blog, commenting everywhere, fighting the liberal hordes wherever we find them. Some more than others, but we are way more involved than the average person. I don’t know about others, but I was always like that. I started to argue at primary school, my teachers hated me. Then came the internet, BBSs, Usenet, IRC, you name it, I’ve been there fighting for my ideals. I used to gang up with friends and crack leftist’s email accounts, then send erotic stories fetched from the web to all the female names in the address book. Damn, it was fun.

As a kid I first was a fairly typical rightist partisan, by late adolescence become a libertarian, then quickly grew up and realised none of it made much sense. Not that I met any intelligent debater who convinced me of the folly of any of it. In fact at the same time that I grew out of libertarianism, came an increasing feeling of tedium over political arguments. First I quickly got bored of debating with dimwits who did little else but parrot partisan lines. But arguing with smart people wasn’t much better. It was better for a while, but after a while I would reach an unbreachable wall of disagreement. Reached the point, the opponent would just deny the facts. And this happened too with good friends, people I had met in real life and had beers with. So it’s not about personal enmity.

I suddenly realised that universal agreement couldn’t be reached, no matter how good is your logic or your facts. It just couldn’t be done. So I basically stopped arguing politics, abandoned all my chat groups, BBSs, everything. Until recently I picked up blog reading, and basically now argue about nuance with people who mostly share my inclinations. I find that the blog comment format very much discourages adversarial debates, so it’s well suited for these little arguments about nuance or perspective.

But I recently saw some example of the old unbreachable wall I was talking about. See here on Yglesias’ blog.

He’s talking about how Brave and Smart and Awesome Marco Rubio is for defending the immigrants into America’s right to live in the USA, as they are just fighting for their “hungry children”. Down in the comments Steve Sailer reminds everyone of the small fact that Mexicans, which are the big majority of illegal immigrants, are hardly hungry, in fact have the second highest obesity rate in the whole world.

Busted! We have a winner! You can’t argue against that. Yet look at that kid, amusingly called ‘reason’, arguing against Sailer saying that “Obesity and malnourishment are not mutually exclusive”. Which is the lamest argument ever. But he got 5 likes! The most liked comment in the whole damn thread. Then see Alcazar’s rebuttal. Nobody gives a shit.

You can’t argue against these people. They are just denying fact. It’s not a river in Egypt, it’s the whole fucking Pacific Ocean. OneSTDV recently found out the same thing, that you can’t argue with passionate liberals. It’s not only liberals though. Try to talk some sense to any cult follower. Or to a sports fan. It’s not even a modern disease. A year ago I totally lost faith on the power of debate, after reading about the Muslim philosopher Al Ghazali.

Anyone today would fairly characterise the muslim world as an intellectual wasteland. All study but that of islamic theology is verboten, and Islamic theology is a mind-numbing legalistic affair which is only focused on whether Muhammad sayings justify a man eating goat meat while the second phase of the moon is starting,  and whether it’s a sin if an earthquake happens, and you happened to be nude with a boner on, and you happen to fall just right into your aunt’s vagina (true story).

But it wasn’t always like this. I won’t parrot the leftist lie that Europe owes its philosophy to Islam, but the Islamic Golden Age actually happened, and it was quite neat. Muslims conquered much of the smartest half of the Roman Empire, and they did learn a lot from it. They produced Al Kindi, Al Khwarizmi, Avicenna. Which were quite awesome by the time. Avicenna even came close to the scientific method. People in Europe rushed to Toledo’s translation school to get their hands in this material. It was good. People argued a lot, ideas were getting out. Formal logic, experimentation. The laws of physics. Good stuff.

But then Al Ghazali came. And like the Yglesiases of today, he had little time for logical argument. He said out and loud, for anyone who would hear him, that the philosophers were a bunch of frauds. All they say is bullcrap. He said there is no cause and no effect. There is no law saying that a flame necessarily burns cotton. From the wiki:

…our opponent claims that the agent of the burning is the fire exclusively;’ this is a natural, not a voluntary agent, and cannot abstain from what is in its nature when it is brought into contact with a receptive substratum. This we deny, saying: The agent of the burning is God, through His creating the black in the cotton and the disconnexion of its parts, and it is God who made the cotton burn and made it ashes either through the intermediation of angels or without intermediation. For fire is a dead body which has no action, and what is the proof that it is the agent? Indeed, the philosophers have no other proof than the observation of the occurrence of the burning, when there is contact with fire, but observation proves only a simultaneity, not a causation, and, in reality, there is no other cause but God.

Allah is great, and all is his doing. There are no patterns in reality. To patterns to exist would mean that Allah is predictable, and that’s a slight. So he is denying  logic, the laws of physics, everything. As simple as that. All he had to do, he morose looking mystic from the eastern desert, to win a debate against the foremost minds of his civilisation, was to say: fuck you. I deny your reality.

fuck you

And he won the argument! He is regarded as “the single most influential Muslim after the Islamic prophet Muhammad”. This guy! Shortly after, Averroes saw the disaster that this man’s thought would cause for the Muslim world, and sought to refute him, but to no avail. Al Ghazali won the debate, and hence the Islamic world has stopped thinking.

This could happen to us too. Logic is fragile. Facts are weak. It all depends in the willingness of the human mind to accept them. Over the last 50 years we have had our fair share of Al Ghazali’s in the West. Keynes. Steven Jay Gould. Jared Diamond. Fuck, the whole western intellectual establishment is based on “stop thinking, equality must be achieved”. We dissenters believe that the inherent madness in the progressive creed will eventually cause collapse, and afterwards sanity will prevail and we will keep on with Civilisation. I’m sure Averroes thought the same thing: he’s just one sophist, sanity will prevail. But 100 years later the Mongols stormed Baghdad, and Islam effectively ceased being a civilisation, meagerly surviving today as a leech of the West. But who will we leech from?

On Authority

Monopoly of violence. Hah. That’s a funny one.

Speaking of which, Mubarak is dead. At least they didn’t shove a knife in his ass while in prison.

The price of becoming the USG’s bitch

I blogged some time ago how The Economist wouldn’t shut up about Myanmar, who recently turned into the Cathedral’s best friend. The China-backed military junta suddenly decided that the Chinese were too big to be trusted, and they decided to make peace with USG. So they dismantled the junta, had an election, freed Aung San’s daughter, and let George Soros’ establish an office in Yangon.

It was a big victory for Hillary Clinton and the recent State Department policy of shifting focus from the Persian Gulf to the Pacific. Which is basically Cold War against China. Just a few months after the new policy started, they stole one pawn from the Chinese! Well done folks. And it’s a dirt poor country. And ethnically diverse!! It’s pure catnip for the USG’s Quango army. Thousands of jobs open to the elite’s wives and daughters!

The problem is, while Myanmar’s elite is surely happy to let USG feed the peasants for them, the Progressive Machine never stops there. Myanmar is really the most unlikely Western ally one can think of. Burma is so called because of its ethnic majority, the Bamar. Bamar is actually pronounced [bama], but it sounds too stupid in English, so they anglified it as “Burma”, according to English RP. Well the Bama people are roughly the 65% of the population, located mainly along the central river valley lowlands, i.e. the good land. The history goes roughly like this: the land was originally sparsely inhabited by the Mon people, which are related to the Cambodians and Vietnamese. Some time around 200 BC, Sino-Tibetan tribes from the North started migrating south, slowly displacing/assimilating the Mon and other previous tribes. Over time, the many Sino-Tibetan tribes started to coalesce around the central lowlands along the Irrawaddy river, creating various kingdoms, whose long dominion created a relatively homogeneous culture that we call today “Burmese”. The other Sino-Tibetan tribes who ended up settling in the border mountains and beyond retained their identity, and the Burmese Kingdom ended up extending its dominion to other areas populated by Thai and other ethnicities. The Bama were in the process of bullying its subjects into assimilation when in 1886 the British Empire came up from India and obliterated the Burmese Kingdom.

ethnic core of Burma

After the Brits left, Burma was given back to the Bama, but the country had been suddenly forced into the industrial age. Ethnic consolidation is almost impossible to do when you have TV, printing presses, Human Rights Watch, and Russian rifles readily available for any secessionist movement. You can’t just do like in the old times, kill and harass people until they forget who their parents were. The Bama were stuck with a country where half the land was held by a patchwork of hundreds of hostile tribes, and they couldn’t do anything about it.

In a sense it’s paradise for an anthropologist. You have the Kayan, a tribe so lousy that they deform the necks of their women with metal rings so they won’t be raped and kidnapped by their neighbours. There’s the Shan, ethnic Thais who number 6 million. The Mon, who are the ancestral population of both Burma and Thailand, are still hanging around numbering 8 million strong. There’s even a small population of ethnic Chinese, the Kokang, who are so stereotypically Chinese that they in the old days managed to set a complex opium growing mechanism by enslaving the Hmong tribes to grow and police the land, and sell the produce to their coethnics in Hong Kong, who then distributed in the US.

The military Junta who governed the country 1962-2011 dealt with the ethnic militias in a kleptocratic fashion, mainly sending army units to function as bandits and squeeze their money. If they got uppity they would shoot to kill, and the situation was stable. But what now? The army’s lost charge, the land is flooded with NGO’s and Human Rights activists and foreign journalists. Any ethnic conflict now will immediately become international news, and the US media style guide for treating ethnic conflict is what we all know: blame the majority. The minority is always right. That’s bad enough in the US or Europe. But in a country like Burma, where 35% of the population are minorities, and they are hostile, vicious, armed, and holding a centuries old grudge, it is going to be VERY bad. Think Balkans bad.

As a prelude to things to come, a textbook example of the ethnic conflict the Western mainstream media loves to write about. The Rohingya.

The Rohingya live in the southwest, in Rakhine state close to the border with Bangladesh. They are a constant pain in the ass, mostly because they are Muslim, and they claim the land is theirs because they descend from Arab traders, which is the Muslim way of saying they are superior to you and they deserve to rule and double tax you. But there’s the little detail that the Rohingya look Bengali. And they speak Bengali. So you have a people living in the border with Bangladesh, who look Bengali and speak Bengali. Furthermore, if you check the sources, it’s quite clear that they descend from Bengali laborers that the British Empire brought to work in the local plantations. But of course Muslims do what Muslims do, which is lie like a rug and be a total pain in the ass for all their neighbours. Gotta fight for Islam, you know. But you don’t just play that shit with Asians. Asians take ethnocentrism seriously, and the local Rakhine Burmese Buddhists aren’t willing to take shit. The central government had long stated that Rohingya are not their citizens, and if they have any problems they should go ask Bangladesh.

Me no bengali

That common sense arrangement has caused the Human Rights/UN racketeers to call the Rohingya “the most persecuted group in Asia”. And that’s exactly the title of a new The Economist article, which writes about the race riots which erupted this week in Rakhine state. Now think again of that title. “The most persecuted group in Asia”. It’s pure unadulterated heart-bleeding puritan housewife bait. Those poor people! The most persecuted! They just want to get along and enjoy democracy! Surely something must be done.

But what are they being persecuted about this time? Well last week some 3 Rohingya chavs grabbed a Rakhine Buddhist girl, robbed her, raped her, and murdered her.No biggy, right?  The Rakhine immediately stormed the closest Rohingya village and killed everyone they found, around 10 people. The Muslims then retaliated, and the ongoing conflict has left around 30 dead or so. All in all your typical run-of-the-mill Third World ethnic conflict. Also if Muslims are involved, odds are they started the whole thing. Had this happened 2 years ago, the junta would have joined their fellow Buddhist, killed a couple hundred Muslims, exiled some others to Bangladesh, and problem solved.

But not now. Never again will the Burmese be able to defend their own people. Because The Economist is now in charge. USG and Soros have troops in the ground, and as the Burmese government is now the bitch of the USG State Department’s money, they will obey. So if Muslims murder your girls, and you retaliate, you have to let Muslims kill you. Because the law of the land is now Human Rights Watch. And they say:

 Elaine Pearson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division said “All those years of discrimination, abuses and neglect are bound to bubble up at some point, and that’s what we are seeing now.”

So it’s the majority’s fault. In 5 years tops, you’d better have an AA program to give your ethnic minorities preferential access to government jobs and money. And if you complain, you’ll be told that the Bamar are guilty because of the junta’s oppression, of which the Bamar were responsible and have to pay. Forever. White guilt for you.

It’s eerily similar to the treatment that Serbia got from NATO. Also annoying Muslims which you are not allowed to touch. With the difference that Myanmar wasn’t bombed into submission by Wesley Clark. The Bamar turned to the USG because they were afraid of China taking over their country. And they were right, the Chinese were really taking it over. But now that the Cathedral is in charge, the Bamar aren’t going to lose to the Chinese. They are going to have their country cut in pieces and served to their ethnic enemies. As Clark himself said:

There is no place (…) for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multiethnic states

Which is code for: your country is not your country once you accept our money. What Burmese will suffer is the equivalent of white guilt. Which is not really white, nor exclusively used against Europeans. It’s majority guilt, it’s the original sin forced unto those groups who could potentially be sovereign. All nations must be redissolved and atomised by ethnic, religious, and sexual-fetish lines. All potential axis of order is to be destroyed, and the chaos resulting is to be administered by the Cathedral’s bureaucracy.

Orwell described the leftist endgame as a boot stomping on a face – forever. I think it’s more like  a Human Rights Watch representative being interviewed by CNN, forever.

By the way check out the comments section of The Economist’s article. One of the funniest thing about The Economist is that it’s thought, not without reason, to be the official spokesman of the Cathedral, and all Third Worlders who can speak some English are constantly trolling there, fighting for their ethnic interests. Muslims are usually very vocal, fighting for Islam in every comment thread. But Burmese as old Brit colonials also fight hard. It’s fun until it gets boring. 80 IQ discussions can only get so far.

100 posts

Today’s post is the 100th post on this blog. Little did I think when I started this blog 9 months ago, that less than a year later I would have a stable and increasing readership, that bloggers that I have followed and admired for years would link to me and comment here, or that my blog’s name would become the first (and second!) hit on a Google search.

I am especially proud of having Foseti link to me regularly, to have Steve Sailer comment here on occasion, or Mencius Moldbug sharing one my posts in hacker news. I started this blog with little expectations, simply as a place to share and articulate the ideas that I thought merited writing down. It seems I did the right thing, writing a blog forces you to articulate your ideas carefully, to write regularly, to be brief, make sense, and to be original. As poor as my writing still is, I like to think that I am contributing some intellectual output against leftism.

As usual my American friends are the cutting edge of political discourse in the internet, and I have strived to have a place in the reactionary blogosphere. We dissidents in Europe have our own set of particular problems to deal with, and issues of language and history make it hard for a blogosphere concerned with political issues in abstract to emerge. But at least we can study what our smarter cousins are writing and apply it in the soon to come struggle for the survival of Civilisation in Europe. To all of you who are thinking on starting to write but can’t find a time to start, just do it. The Resistance against liberalism needs more people, all it can get.

So thanks everyone for your support, and please do keep coming by, I will keep up the good work.

 

PS: I also used the occasion to change the theme into something with wider paragraphs and less empty white space. Should be nicer on the eyes for night time readers.

Jihadis are amateurs; or ethnocentrism done right

I always heard about those Muslim suicide bombers, and the boring MSM outrage about those “poor” and “desperate” souls who kill themselves for the cause. How can that happen? The act of killing oneself is thought to be so alien, so extreme, so utterly incomprehensible that the common causes the western commentariat comes up with are evil white colonialism or its modern descendant, evil Zionism. The assumption is that something as unfathomably bad as suicide bombing can only be caused by the supreme evil, the trascendental victimiser: white people. What else can it be?

Letting aside the fact that suicide bombers end up killing and victimising way more people besides themselves, in the end Liberalism is the cult of autonomy, and suicide just doesn’t make sense. It’s arguably a worse evil to forsake one’s autonomy and kill oneself, than just kill random people. Killing others is a choice, an act of the will, so it’s not that bad in the end. It’s just “tragic”. Killing one’s own will though, that is sheer madness. That’s beyond evil. It’s sacrilege.

For others like me whose brains aren’t tainted by liberal memetic retardation, suicide bombing makes a lot of sense. This people get to go to heaven! And they get 72 virgins all for them!! And they die by explosion, in the act, with little pain involved. If you believe in the stuff, it’s a hell of a deal. So I’m not surprised at all by suicide jihadis. I’m surprised there’s not more of them. Then again people are people and not everyone really believes in the stuff, so apparently there’s always some degree of coercion involved. Still, once you’ve been forced to put on the bomb belt under threat of killing your momma, you grab a Koran, start reading it, and in a matter of minutes necessity turns into virtue, and you’re soon glad to go meet your houris.

So when you think about it suicide bombing is really quite rational. Which on the other hand, also means that shahids are really pussies. They aren’t brave nor admirable. They’re just doing it for what’s in it for them. They are being somewhat forced into it, as part of a war operation, according to plan, and it gives real world results. And it’s not even painful. The whole noble martyr thing is shit. These guys are amateurs, I tell you. Greg Cochran is right that Middle Easterners are just not cut out for fighting. They are born, bred, evolved pussies. You know who is the real deal?

Tibetans. Those guys are hardcore. Tibetans kill themselves not by easy instantaneous explosives. Oh no. They put themselves on fire, which is extremely painful, takes minutes to kill you. Take a good look at it:

fuck yeah

There are more pictures and a couple of videos here at Huffington Post. The best thing is not the horrible death this guy forced unto himself. The best thing is the whole situation. This guy didn’t kill anyone, wasn’t part of any militia, probably didn’t even receive any orders from above. This guy killed himself during a demonstration in New Delhi. Tibetan exiles left Tibet after China cracked down on a rebellion in 1959, and have been living off CIA largesse across the Indian border, where they are more or less confined. As China won’t let them back in, and they have nowhere else to go, their political action is done in India. But of course India’s government has absolutely nothing to do with the Tibetans plight. This guy killing himself in the Indian capital is going to do nothing to further their cause. Absolutely nothing. This guy didn’t kill himself to achieve a military objective. Not even a political objective. This guy is so badass, he put himself on fire for nothing. He killed himself for the sake of it. This guy is hardcore. Mohamed Atta is just a pussy compared to him.

The demonstration happened because China’s president, Hu Jintao is visiting India, and they wanted to embarrass him. Yeah, Chinese oppressor, you will have to carry this on your conscience!

“This is what China faces unless they give freedom to Tibet,” said Tenzin Dorjee, a young onlooker.

But the guy isn’t even there yet. And even if he were, he wouldn’t give a shit. Hu Jintao is the president of China precisely because he used to be the governor of Tibet, where he masterfully cracked down a series of Tibetan riots that happened during his tenure. He killed so many Tibetans that the Chinese Politburo gave him the presidency. He has been carrying over his conscience thousands upon thousands of self-burned and not-so-self burned Tibetans. Another dozen won’t make any difference.

But why are Tibetans so badass?, you might think. The Tibetan movement is popular worldwide, mainly by the leftist student, hippie, Quango, Occupy Wall Street crowd. Which of course share with the Dalai Lama their being funded by USG money. I won’t bore you with the history of what really happened in Tibet before and after the Chinese occupation, but anyone with half a brain should know that the Dalai Lama is a fraud and the Tibetans are the nuttiest people on earth. See how the self-burners justify their actions:

“Our culture our language is all being taken away from us, if we don’t fight back all that will be left of Tibet will be some monks. The Chinese government gives us economic development, but that’s not enough. The most important thing for tibetans is our spiritual life”

I’ll translate that for you. China has been investing huge amounts of money in Tibet, building infrastructure and developing the economy there. That has two objectives: one is the obvious motive of making money out of the land you have; the other is to get the Tibetans to enjoy a modern life and forget their medieval religion, hence their identity. If Tibetans stop believing that being slaves of Dalai Lama is the way to heaven, they might assimilate to mainstream Chinese culture, as most of the 55 ethnic minorities in China have done.The Dalai Lama crowd understands that if Tibetans become wealthier, they will cease being Tibetans. And their ethnocentrism is so strong that they will gladly burn themselves to death to increase by 0.00001% the chances of the tribe’s survival.

In other words, Tibetans are like Haredis, without the brains. I have been around and I have met Tibetans in China, and the strategy is more or less working. Tibetans today are pretty much your run-of-the-mill secular hedonists, if quite trashy. Tibetans are pretty low IQ, high T for Chinese standards, they’re rough, violent, good with girls, and have a characteristic gipsy-ish feeling about them. You wouldn’t want them as your neighbours.

But China is hell bent to destroy their identity. Whatever their exiled elites do and say, China’s Foreign Ministry is sooo used to this shit, that they have actually come up with witty and smart rebunks to the Tibetan’s demands:

“As is well known, except for a few extremist groups in the world, all religious groups respect life and oppose violence. Not condemning self-immolation, but playing it up and inciting others to follow the example is challenging the common conscience and moral bottom line of humanity.”

Which is to say: this guys are nuts. They are. And we pay them with Western money, in the small Cold War we are fighting against China. That’s what the USG does, enabling Jihad and Medieval Lamaism in the world. Who’s the traditionalist here?

Satoshi Kanazawa rehabilitated by the Cathedral

I was reading The Economist yesterday, amusingly checking out what the Cathedral and its minions are up to these days. I checked in vain for any news about Kate Rothschild, but it seems the family won’t touch the subject. Oh well.

I did find something amusing though, if totally unrelated. An interview with Satoshi Kanazawa! Yes, Kanazawa the evolutionary psychologist. He used to have a very good blog at Psychology Today, titled “The Scientific Fundamentalist”. Well he titled it wrong. Last year he was expelled, widely denounced and lynched in the internet for daring to write a blog post about the fact that black women are considered ugly by most races. Besides being true, Kanazawa is the first guy who wouldn’t want to talk about race and sex, he being an Oriental man, whose odds in the sexual marketplace are almost as bad as black women’s. But he is a fundamentalist for truth, so he wrote it. Well, the other, real deal fundamentalists cracked down and sent him to exile.

I l… l…. love Big Brother

I thought he had been Watsoned for good, but hey, here he is in the Pravda of the powers that be. He even got a big picture of himself taken. It does look a bit forced though, like the face that Winston Smith would put in front of his party superiors. I wonder what did he have to do to get exonerated. Has he been seen in public with a black woman recently? Perhaps he has been forced to screw Michelle Obama and write a report on how now he knows that race doesn’t exist.

The interview though is quite good, a very to the point talk about Kanazawa’s most famous theory, namely that general intelligence (g) can be defined as the ability to deal with evolutionary novel situations, i.e. things that didn’t happen often in humanity’s ancestral environment. He argues that the dumbest of dumb people are perfectly equipped with the skills to live in the African savannah, mainly feeding oneself, finding a hot mate and screwing her. Intelligent people though are more likely to have problems finding mates, to drink alcohol, to do drugs, to listen to instrumental music, to enjoy reading, etc. All things that didn’t exist in the savannah.

I was going to write that his theory is way too simplistic, but then I remember reading that 24% of american college grad women had experienced anal sex, but only 17% of high school grads. So perhaps there is something to it. Smart people are more consistently weird, but in my experience the degree of weirdness doesn’t quite correlate with the IQ level (meaning a 140 IQ person isn’t consistently weirder than a 130). Or does it? His point that dumb people are better parents also sounds forced. The dumbest people on earth, Australian abos, routinely raped and ate their children. Kanazawa argues that smart people have less children so that makes you a worse parent. He could have just said that dumb people have more kids, which is true, than use the phrase “better parents“, which is too open to interpretation. But he had to say so I guess. Now that I think about it, that’s the price he had to pay for his rehabilitation. The whole interview is about “the disadvantage of smarts”. Which is another way of saying “IQ doesn’t exist”, i.e. “we’re all the same”, i.e. “the social engineering programs we fund with your taxpayer’s money are going to continue and all my friends and family will be hired by them and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

Still I’m glad to see him back. I have a particular appreciation for him for being a born and raised japanese scientist who has made it abroad, and can actually speak English! That’s as rare, no, much rarer, than a beautiful black woman. So cheers for Kanazawa.

UPDATE: Here’s another recent video by Kanazawa: We haven’t evolved in 10.000 years. Perhaps Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending might want to have a word with him. Is this another surrender to the Progressive creed? Say it ain’t so.

Student tracking done right

Says here that as today only 30% of Portuguese have graduated high school. (H/T Chalupas central)

That surely means that…

Portuguese universities are awesome! Everybody’s smart there. Or at least they used to be, as this fella commenting at Chalupas points out:

15-64, the rate is 35% (up from ~20% 10 years ago). For the >65 cohorts, rates are 7%.

So yeah plenty of dumb kids are getting overeducated lately, but it still seems better than the average in other countries. I get quite a lot of traffic from Portugal, and not much from other southern European countries. Which of course proves my point. Obrigado a todos.

By the way I have been quoting Cheap Chalupas’ blog quite recently lately, all while showering him with hate and curses. Just want to make clear that for all his faults I do think that Tyler Cowen is a good blogger. He (and his friends) should just be paid as such.

The education bubble, Japanese style

It is widely acknowledged everywhere in the civilised world that universities are not a place you go to learn. It used to be that they were a “temple of wisdom” where only bookish people would go to learn real stuff. You needed some real brains to go there.

Now of course the ersatz upward mobility created by democracy has pretty much broken that system. Now everybody has to go to college, because we are all equally smart. But we are not, and as much as we like pretending we are, being able to filter the smart from the dumb is still very necessary. Universities historically were a very good filter; dumb people just didn’t go there. But you didn’t need to go to University to prove you are smart. My father always tells me about the dozens of IQ tests he had to take when job hunting back in the 60s. You could also become an apprentice using some family connections, and if you were worth anything, over time your CV would show that.

That doesn’t work now; you can’t directly test your employees, and everybody today goes to some college or another. You have to. Gotta keep up with the Jones. So for a business today, a high-school grad pretty much means “dumb“. Who doesn’t go to college anyway? This chicken-and-egg conundrum has made university education a hell of a business.

But the fact remains that STEM grads aside, University is a waste of time. It’s a huge waste of time. You are losing 4 years or more of your most healthy, most active years. Not only doing nothing, but socialising in an artificial paradise full of horny co-eds, being taught idealistic bullshit that can only fuck up your expectations.  As Houellebecq said, compared to college, joining the workforce is like entering the grave. I can’t understand why so few people go mad after the transition. It’s unreal.

From which you can deduce that the optimal arrangement for society would be for companies to hire their employees before they have gone through their college years, but after the have gone through the university selection process. And that’s what Japan has been doing for some time.

Japanese companies hiring process is a very weird ritualised process. They (generally) only hire newly graduated kids, and they only open the hiring process for a set time every year. They first open “Explanation meetings” (説明会) in big cities where interested kids would go learn about the company and what it does. If you’re interested you would grab an application form and submit a handwritten application, if you went through you would go to an interview, or several if needed.

In the old days this process would start after graduation. Then companies competing for the best grads would start the process a couple of days earlier, then weeks, then months. As of 2011 the hiring process started at the middle of junior year, when you would be given an “assurance of hire”, and join he company after graduation, more than a year later. You can’t apply if you’re already a senior, and will lose your job if you fail to graduate later. Universities have responded by making the curriculum easy to finish in two and a half years, so you can focus on job hunting at the second half of junior year, and use your senior year to travel or whatever you fancy.

The general sense of it all is that all a company cares is that you are smart enough to get into college, and you have the minimum conscientiousness to graduate. They mostly don’t care about your studies, your grades, and feel no remorse in interrupting your student life at the middle of it. It is understood that the content of your education will be worthless. So why insist on college grads at all?

According to this post by Noah Smith (H/T Cheap chalupas), who resides used to reside in Japan,  the insistence on employees having a college degree is because kids learn to socialise at university, have some parties, date some girls, and that motivates people to work harder, which business value. Well, if businesses valued their employees having a life they would stop forcing them to do overtime and meaningless make-work crap. All the points he gives about University enabling you to meet smart and diverse people, which gives you perspective and makes you feel cool, are good arguments for why students choose to pay big money and time to go to university. But businesses don’t really give a shit. At most they think that a kid that chooses not to go college, i.e. a kid that gives up having 4 years of partying, drinking and banging, is a loser who is likely to cause problems further on. But if companies, and particularly Japanese companies gave a shit about the mental stability of their employees, Japan wouldn’t have the suicide rate it has.

Human capital in the making

In fact some companies are starting to push the process even earlier. If companies are hiring juniors, why not hire freshmen or sophomore all the same? Well that’s what Uniqlo, the fashion brand, has started doing this year. They will open their annual hiring process as usual, but they also accepted freshmen and sophomores this time. Those that pass the selection will work on some of their stores part time while at college, and simply continue full time once they graduate. So they start working at the same time as they start studying. Little partying is going to go on here.

Perhaps it’s true that companies don’t care about intelligence in abstract. They just don’t want losers in. And a kid who doesn’t go to college is weird. Creepy. The undeniable intelligence signaling, combined with the unrealistically fun and fulfilling environment that colleges provide, no sane kid is going to give up going to college for a head start in entering the workforce grave. That’s not cool. And that’s all there is about it, signaling social adjustment. Normality. Not human capital. Do people have more human capital after 4 years of leftist indoctrination, binge drinking and easy sex with empowered sluts? Give me a break. The industrial revolution happened without college requirements. The post war economic boom happened without college requirements.

But who am I arguing against? Economists make a living of assigning simple and rational causes to complex phenomena. Inflation promotes consumption! Immigration causes economic growth! Cheap chalupas correlate with national happiness! Business want employees who party hard! Right. If this were a rational world, economists wouldn’t get paid. They’re no better than Byzantine theologians.