Author: VD

When hit pieces go awry

Can you say “Streisand Effect”? 2, 4, 7, 8… imagine what this will look like when we get issues #5, #6, and the first collection out! I suppose they will interpret this as more evidence of our nefarious astroturfing rather than their attempt to discredit us backfiring on them.

Trust the plan. Back the campaign.

UPDATE: After reading the transcript, I’m pretty sure 2VS didn’t listen to the whole piece when he praised it as “a fabulous NPR show about The Alt Right in comics.” He clearly doesn’t realize that he’s a bigger, fatter, more vulnerable target for the SJWs than I am, or that they’re already coming after him and his fellow ComicsGate Nazis.

Al Letson: All that anger has been rolled up into a hash tag, ComicsGate.

Al Letson: This isn’t just about comics, who gets to tell stories and who doesn’t, it’s also about money. One of the leaders behind ComicsGate has over 80,000 YouTube followers, and he’s raised nearly $400,000 for a graphic novel. This is war profiteering in the culture war, and fighting these battles has elevated him from an angry fanboy to a paid provocateur.

UPDATE: AH#1-4 are now four of the top six in the category. Plus CDA#2 and GG#2 in the top ten.

The Darwinian fraud

The late Larry Auster was also an evolutionary skeptic. He wrote this back in 2010.

The Darwinian theory of evolution is a fraud—and it’s not Lawrence Auster who says that, it’s the Darwinian scientists who say it

Many times I have pointed out that the critics of the Darwinian theory of evolution do not need to prove that the theory fails to explain the origin of species by random mutation and natural selection, because the theory’s advocates frequently admit the same. Yet in a massive exercise of Orwellian doublethink, even while scientists repeatedly confess, if sotto voce, that the theory does not explain what it purports to explain (yes, it explains micro-changes within a life form, but not the evolution of new life forms), they and the whole world simultaneously keep declaring that the Darwinian theory has the status of proven fact, as true as the theory of gravity, and that anyone who doubts this is a faith-crazed moron barely worthy of the adjective “human.”

However, here’s an admission from the evolutionary establishment that really takes the cake. In their 2005 book, The Plausibility of Life: Resolving Darwin’s Dilemma (dilemma? dilemma? Darwin has a dilemma?), evolutionary scientists Marc Kirschner and John Gerhart come right out and declare that up to this point, evolutionary science has not shown how Darwinian evolution produces new organs, new species, new life forms. The fly leaf of the book says:

In the 150 years since Darwin, the field of evolutionary biology has left a glaring gap in understanding how animals developed their astounding variety and complexity. The answer has been that small genetic mutations accumulate over time to produce wondrous innovations such as eyes and wings. Drawing on cutting-edge research across the spectrum of modern biology, Marc Kirschner and John Gerhart demonstrate how this stock answer is woefully inadequate. [LA replies: Meaning, the Darwinian theory of evolution by random genetic mutations and natural selection is woefully inadequate.] Rather they offer an original solution to the long-standing puzzle of how small random genetic change can be converted into complex useful innovations.

So, an entirely original theory is needed to explain how random mutations can accumulate into functional new biological forms. Meaning that the explanations offered up to this point have been wrong. Meaning that everything we’ve been told about how evolutionary theory has the status of proven fact has been false.

Yet (remember, we’re living in an Orwellian world) Kirschner and Gerhart’s astounding admission has not entered into the general public consciousness. One reason it hasn’t can be seen in Paul R. Gross’s review of the book in the New York Sun in 2005. Gross spent the first half of the review pounding his chest about how perfect and complete and absolutely unquestionable the Darwinian theory is, until, in the second half of the review, he quietly admitted that some eentsy teentsy issues still remain to be demonstrated, like, you know, how new species evolved. Yet so assured was Gross’s propaganda in the first half of the article, that his dramatic admission in the second half made no impact. Only a careful reader would notice it. And most people do not read carefully.

A failure to anticipate

Apparently the Russians aren’t buying the excuses of the Israelis who went to Moscow to plead their innocence in the case of the IL-20 that was shot down over Syria last week.

One week after a Russian plane was accidentally shot down by Syrian missiles launched at Israeli fighter jets, Russia has announced it will supply the Syrian army with sophisticated S-300 surface-to-air missiles.

Israel has asked the Russians for many years to avoid supplying S-300 missiles to Syria because it could limit the Israeli Air Force’s freedom of operation in Syria. The Russian announcement threatens to break the coordination mechanism between the two countries in Syria and unravel what was thought to be a close relationship between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

That’s certainly a good way to shoot yourself in the foot when you were asking someone a favor.

Directly over the target

NPR has released their hitpiece on Arkhaven and Alt★Hero. It’s rather remarkable to observe how many people they manage to implicitly insult, from the Arkhaven backers to the entire comics industry. I think my favorite part was, after insinuating that our funding was illegitimate, the poor, disappointed Chuck Dixon fan who is ever so disappointed to learn that his childhood hero is a negative influence on innocent comics readers asks Amanda “MAGA” Robb how Alt★Hero is doing upon release, and is surprised to be informed that it is a #1 bestseller on Amazon.

Their explanation? We are gaming the system by a) having fans buy it on Kindle and read it on Kindle Unlimited, and, b) targeting a “very small” microcategory on Amazon. That category? Comics and Graphic Novels: Superheroes.

We’re clearly not dealing with rocket surgeons here.

Here is the punchline: after spending all this time trying to insinuate that I am a shadowy international figure with questionable sources of funding and astroturfed succcess, they spent the last quarter of the interview talking to Marvel Vice-President Sana Amanat, of all people.

Anyhow, if anyone feels up to assembling a transcript, send it to me and I’ll do a Darkstream dissecting their shady pseudo-journalistic shenanigans. And if you weren’t certain about backing the AH-Q campaign, this NPR hit piece should provide you with all the convincing you need, because it’s evident that nothing discombobulates them more than Arkhaven’s crowdfunding success.

UPDATE: Just like a school of fish… here come the fake reviews!

Pass on this one  
Justin Mingus September 24, 2018
Just alt-right racist nonsense.

Are you kidding me?
John Rasmussen September 23, 2018
I can’t believe that Amazon would allow this to be available. This hate speech is utterly disgusting. I honestly don’t know what else to say. This goes against everything that comics stand for.

It’s poorly written and illustrated propaganda.
Jason Yargeron September 23, 2018
Trash for trash.

another alt-right diatribe
Lucy Owsleyon September 23, 2018
All I saw was poorly written alt right brain washing hate art.

Propaganda aimed at children
Joseph Webb September 23, 2018
Seriously? Famous white supremacist writes a comic book? Alt-Hero of alt-truth, for the alt-right. Shameful.


UPDATE: Old Two-Face jumps in to try to play divide-and-conquer.

ComicArtistPro Secrets @EthanVanSciver
Just listened to a fabulous NPR show about The Alt Right in comics.

Poor Chuck Dixon. Cornered and asked why he’s working for Vox Day by these people. He should have said,”Because he’s paying me and I have bills to pay.”

ComicsGate is coming, Chuck. Come work with us instead.

The amusing thing is that it won’t be long before 2VS is whining about the way Amanda Robb treats him in her upcoming and no-doubt-equally fabulous Rolling Stone article about the Nazis of ComicsGate. And in case you weren’t aware that 2VS’s claims about me trying to coopt ComicsGate are absolutely false, note that he was following my lead from the start before he abruptly turned around, feigned ignorance, and started dancing for the SJWs.

On 1/23/2018 6:42 PM, ComicArtistPro Secrets wrote:
Vox, I’m VERY EXPENSIVE.  Me shifting to an independent venture just doesn’t seem likely, unless SJWs completely take over and dominate DC Comics this year and my entire mainstream career collapses   I will probably re-up with them or shock the world by going to Marvel.  I am watching you…I mean, Arkhaven might become a going concern that can support a book that I’ve drawn,  but it isn’t now.  You guys need to draw a fan base and maintain sales, learn how to reprint and repackage work in trade paper backs and hardcover editions, sell posters and prints, everything.  There has to be a ton of cash coming in from buyers, not just kickstarters. 

You can do it.  But it’ll be a lot of work.
EVS

That sounds just a little bit ironic these days, ne c’est pas? You can just about guarantee that 2VS is eventually going to stab ComicsGate in the back somehow, just like he has everyone else he’s worked with, from colorists to commissioned art buyers.

Darkstream: Amazon revives Gun Ghoul

From the transcript of the Darkstream:

The thing that you have to understand here is that this can happen to anyone. SJWs will abuse their positions if given the opportunity. Once you become a target, for whatever reason, however harmless you are, however harmless you believe yourself to be, however moderate you believe yourself to be, they will attempt to monkeywrench. It’s guaranteed, and again, it’s not just people like me, you know, actually, someone like me doesn’t get attacked that much because the SJWs know perfectly well that I’m not going to give in to them. I will actually go to the trouble of doing the exact opposite simply because I’m not willing to let myself be manipulated by them, but if you look at what’s happening with the Linux kernel….

Now, we all thought that the Linux kernel was unassailable because Linus Torvalds had established such a ruthless meritocracy, with no respect for feelings whatsoever. Now, suddenly, what we’re seeing is that thanks to the cancer known as Coraline, SJWs have managed to successfully oust Linus and they’ve managed to establish a code of conduct that they’ve already weaponized. They’re already using it to go after non-SJWs and try to eject them from positions of influence within the project, and so, you know, you have to understand that this is not a figment of my imagination!

I wrote about this back in 2015. Nothing has changed. I even specifically warned about this in SJWs Always Double Down, I specifically warned of the danger of codes of conduct and about this Coraline creature. Specifically! And now we’re seeing Linux, of all things, being converged, and you see people like Roosh whose books have been under attack, and the thing is that virtue-signaling and trying to get back in their good graces like we’re seeing some of the ComicsGate people do is not going to work. It’s not going to work because it’s not about you, it’s about them! They need to be oppositional. You know, once they have you as a target, you are of use to them, and if you are a target who is willing to virtue signal, what you’re doing is you’re painting a target on your chest. You’re not signaling virtue to them to them you’re signaling weakness and they’re going to keep pushing at it and they’re going to keep coming after it.


In the Darkstream, we also discussed the optimal timing of the next major Arkhaven campaign, which will be for a new series totally unrelated to Alt-Hero or any of our existing comics. This comment by a strong ComicsGate supporter was informative.

The indigogo fatigue is real, I started feeling it a few weeks ago. I’ve backed 19 of the indigogo comics so far though so perhaps that has something to do with it. I remember watching Mike S Millers stream some months ago where he interviewed a friend/colleague who recommended against launching close to: tax time and both before and after christmas. Like you said Vox, most people want their gifts in time for xmas and probably would be broke afterwards due to paying off credit cards. I live in Australia so I am unware of tax time for Americans and Euros. I’d say Feb-Nov would be a safe bet for indigogo campaigns, taking into account regional tax periods. 

Quarterly campaigns (4 times a year) also seem like a safe bet. Though apparently launching a fresh campaign while leaving another uncompleted or unfulfilled is a big crowd-funding “no no”. Several Comicsgaters chided Diversity and Comics for launching Iron Sights whilst leaving Jawbreakers unfulfilled. However this may not apply to you as you have a history of fulfilling campaigns and Arkhaven has already a reputation for providing its products.

Share your thoughts, especially if you’re an Alt-Hero backer. We’re well aware of the fatigue aspect; it hasn’t escaped our attention that AH:Q has about half the number of backers that the original AH did. Keep in mind that for us a) these campaigns are as much to test the strength of the demand as to raise the resources required, and, b) we have different art teams on the different series, so there is no impact whatsoever on the speed with which the current projects are being completed.

That being said, I’m leaning towards mid-January at the soonest. I just don’t see how it would be a good idea to do anything before then and we’d like to see Alt★Hero: Q finish strong. Plus, waiting will give us more time to put together some truly killer campaign resources.

The pseudoscience of Darwin

Fred is tormenting the true believers with observable facts again:

Science is supposed to be objective study of nature, impelled by a willingness to follow the evidence impartially wherever it leads. For the most part it works this way. In the case of emotionally charged topics, it does not. For example, racial intelligence, cognitive differences between the sexes, and weaknesses in Darwinian evolution. Scientists who do perfectly good research in these fields, but arrive at forbidden conclusions, will be hounded out of their fields, fired from academic and research positions, blackballed from employment, and have their careers destroyed.

A prime example is Richard Sternberg, a Ph.D. in biology (Molecular Evolution) from Florida International University and a Ph.D. in Systems Science (Theoretical Biology) from Binghamton University. He is not a lightweight. From 2001-2007 he was staff scientist at the National Center for Biotechnology Information; 2001-2007 a Research Associate at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History.

Hell broke loose when he authorized in 2004 the publication, in the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, an organ of the Smithsonian Institution, of a peer-reviewed article, The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher taxonomic Categories by Stephen Meyer. It dealt with the possibility of intelligent design as an explanation of aspects of Darwinism not explainable by the conventional theory. This is a serious no-no among the guardians of conventional Darwinism, the political correctness of science.

At the Smithsonian, he was demoted, denied access to specimens he needed in his work, transferred to work under a hostile supervisor, and lost his office space. In the ensuring storm of hatred, two separate federal investigations concluded that he had been made the target of malicious treatment.

Predictably, the establishment dismisses Meyer’s idea ass “pseudoscience”:

Wikipedia: The Sternberg peer review controversy concerns the conflict arising from the publication of an article supporting the pseudo-scientific concept of intelligent design in a scientific journal, and the subsequent questions of whether proper editorial procedures had been followed and whether it was properly peer reviewed.

Pseudoscience? Does not Darwinism itself qualify as pseudoscience? It is firmly based on no evidence. For most readers this assertion will seem as delusional as saying that the sun revolves around the earth. This is because we have been indoctrinated since birth in the Darwinian myth.

Like Fred, I am an evolutionary skeptic, not because of intelligent design or most of the issues that Fred raises, but because I have never observed any evolutionist able to demonstrate an adequate ability to address, let alone successfully answer, the direct questions about evolution posed to them. Instead, they always – always – attempt to turn the discussion to the Book of Genesis, the age of the Earth, Christianity, the public school system, or some other topic totally unrelated to the one at hand instead.

That is why I am still a skeptic concerning the secularism’s epic myth, despite having read every book ever published by Richard Dawkins, despite having read Wilson, and Gould, and Shermer, and Hauser, and a number of other well-regarded evolutionary popularizers.  At this point, it might be more accurate to say I am an evolutionary skeptic because I have read those books and been astounded by the panoply of obvious logical flaws, evasions, and handwaving that I have encountered in them.

I was pleased to recently run across one of my favorite quotes, from the Pharyngula days of yore:

Keynesian economics, like evolutionary biology, has an outstanding record of success, and has become the foundation for a vast amount of productive work in its field. 

Dead on arrival

PM points out that the popular free trade argument that trade prevents war is based on an early 20th century Nobel prize-winner’s idea that proved itself to be an epic falsehood within seven years of its first articulation:

Norman Angell is most widely remembered for his 1909 pamphlet, Europe’s Optical Illusion, which was published the following year (and many years thereafter) as the book, The Great Illusion. (The anti-war film La Grande Illusion took its title from his pamphlet.) The thesis of the book was that the integration of the economies of European countries had grown to such a degree that war between them would be entirely futile, making militarism obsolete. This quotation from the “Synopsis” to the popular 1913 edition summarizes his basic argument.

He establishes this apparent paradox, in so far as the economic problem is concerned, by showing that wealth in the economically civilized world is founded upon credit and commercial contract (these being the outgrowth of an economic interdependence due to the increasing division of labour and greatly developed communication). If credit and commercial contract are tampered with in an attempt at confiscation, the credit-dependent wealth is undermined, and its collapse involves that of the conqueror; so that if conquest is not to be self-injurious it must respect the enemy’s property, in which case it becomes economically futile. Thus the wealth of conquered territory remains in the hands of the population of such territory. When Germany annexed Alsace, no individual German secured a single mark’s worth of Alsatian property as the spoils of war. Conquest in the modern world is a process of multiplying by x, and then obtaining the original figure by dividing by x. For a modern nation to add to its territory no more adds to the wealth of the people of such nation than it would add to the wealth of Londoners if the City of London were to annex the county of Hertford.

Whenever you dig into the logic of free trade or the arguments presented on its behalf, you inevitably discover that they are based on foundations that were conclusively proven to be rotten decades, or even centuries, ago. One of the most remarkable things about free traders I have observed is their relentlessly stubborn ignorance of the roots of their own economic philosophy.

Of course they don’t know anything about Norman Angell’s case for trade. One can hardly criticize them for that, as it was justly obscured by the course of historical events. But free trade advocates don’t even understand the specifics, let alone the intrinsic flaws, of David Ricardo’s comparative advantage argument.

Killswitch the Linux Code of Conduct

Don’t wait to be ejected from the Linux Kernel Community, contributors. Throw the killswitch, rescind your license grants NOW, and force the SJWs who are trying to converge your project to permanently withdraw the cancerous Code of Conduct.

Date Thu, 20 Sep 2018 09:28:14 +0000
From unconditionedwitness@redchan …
Subject Re: A Plea to Unfuck our Codes of Conduct

Regarding those who are ejected from the Linux Kernel Community after this CoC:

Contributors can, at any time, rescind the license grant regarding their property via written notice to those whom they are rescinding the grant from (regarding their property (code)) .

The GPL version 2 lacks a no-rescission clause (the GPL version 3 has such a clause: to attempt furnish defendants with an estoppel defense, the Linux Kernel is licensed under version 2, however, as are the past contributions).

When the defendants ignore the rescission and continue using the plaintiff’s code, the plaintiff can sue under the copyright statute.

Banned contributors _should_ do this (note: plaintiff is to register their copyright prior to filing suit, the copyright does not have to be registered at the time of the violation however)

Additionally when said banned contributors joined the Linux team, they were under the impression that it was a meritocracy: in-fact this belief was stated or ratified by those within the governing body regarding Linux when the contributors began their work (whatever that body was at that time, it could have been simply Linus, or Linus and a few associates).

The remuneration for the work was implied to be, or perhaps stated, to be fame as-well as a potential increase in the contributors stature, in addition to membership in the Linux Kernel club or association, or whatever it is that the Linux Kernel Community actually is (which a court may determine… it is something, suffice to say).

Thusly for work, consideration was promised by (Linus? Others? There are years of mailing list archives with which to determine).

And now that consideration has been clawed-back and the contributors image has been tarnished.

Thus the worker did work, however the other side of the implied, or perhaps written (email memorandums), understanding has been violated (once the contributor has been banned under the new non-meritocratic “CoC”).

Damages could be recovered under: breach of contract, quazi-contract, libel, false-light. (services rendered for the contractual claims, future lost income for the libel claims). In addition to copyright claims. (statutory damages, profits)

For greatest effect, all rescission should be done at once in a bloc. (With other banned contributors).

Contributors: You were promised something, you laboured for that promise, and now the promise has become a lie. You have remedies available to you now, as-well as in the close future .

Additionally, regarding those who promoted the Code of Conduct to be used against the linux kernel contributors, knowing full well the effect it would have and desiring those effects; recovery for the ejected contributors via a tortious interference claim may be possible.

Most of the legal babble is the usual ignorant nonsense, but the license rescinding threat is both real and significant. And in this case, because the Code of Conduct has already been imposed, all the non-SJW contributors would be advised to act now and force a complete retreat by those who are successfully attempting to converge the project. We know how this always turns out.

These losers did the same in the comic industry and the gaming industry and now they are trying it in the open source community.

Fortunately, some contributors are seriously considering withdrawing their code, although they need to simply go ahead and do it now. Dire threats and warnings never, ever work with these lunatics. They always – and usually correctly – assume that you’re going to back down.

My company is already considering the full withdrawal of all contributed code to the kernel project and related embedded kernel projects. You literally can’t run embedded Linux on industrial controls or handheld scanners without this code.

Assuming the Code of Conduct can be removed, an anti-SJW inquisition would be the correct next step, followed by permanent exclusion and ideological policing. Because, as you have been openly warned, the Code of Conduct is an SJW weapon and it is only a prelude of ruthless enforcement and even worse things to come.

Coraline Ada Ehmke @CoralineAda
Sep 20
Adopting a code of conduct is STEP ONE and does nothing to address systemic issues. The hard work is in designing an enforcement process, answering some hard questions about accountability and safety, and following through.

Coraline Ada Ehmke@CoralineAda
Sep 20
Looking for community financial support. Having a CoC is a first step, but fair enforcement is what makes all the difference. I’m working on an open source SaaS app to make this easier.

Fortunately, some in the Linux community are clearly aware of the SJW threat to their open source projects, their technology, and their careers.

With the recent Social Justice capture of the Linux kernel, many in the open source world may find this guide from Vox Day to be useful. I present it here as a public service; you can find the original PDF here. If you are interested in how to resist the introduction of the Contributor Convenant and other Social Justice derived Codes of Conduct, you may wish to watch this presentation or see the slides for it.

Some readers will recall that I specifically warned about Cancer Coraline and xir Codes of Conduct in SJWs Always Double Down.

The two primary weapons utilized by corporate SJWs to marginalize opponents of convergence are the now-ubiquitous Code of Conduct and the Community Committee. While codes of conduct sound sensible enough in theory, in practice they are very vaguely worded documents that serve much the same purpose for the Community Committees responsible for enforcing them that petty traffic laws do for the police. Namely, they permit the Community Committee, which may be named the Steering Committee or even the Code of Conduct Committee, to charge anyone who is insufficiently enthusiastic about the organization’s new social justice priorities with Code of Conduct violations. Since both looking at another individual and not looking at another individual can be deemed violations of the vast majority of these codes of conduct, you can probably see how they can be weaponized in order to freeze, isolate, and eliminate opponents.

In practice, codes of conduct are also used to smoke out and identify opposition to the SJWs, as the initial skeptics who are the most able to understand the danger posed by a proposed code of conduct will usually tend to serve as the nexus of the resistance against it.

He means it

Fake Pope Francine isn’t actually joking:

Greeting journalists Saturday en route to Lithuania, Francis was given a book about the former pope by Polish photographer Grzegorz Galazka. Receiving the large book with a beaming John Paul on the cover, Francis quipped: “(Pope John Paul II) was a saint, I am the devil.”

The servitors of evil just love telling everyone the plain truth in public. It’s as if they’re under a compulsion to do so. And you can’t later claim you weren’t warned.