Category: Uncategorized

RIP Keith Flint

It would appear the lead singer of Prodigy decided he was done.

I’m not saving up for anything. I’m cashing it all now. I’ve always had this thing inside me that, when I’m done, I’ll kill myself. I swear to God that’s not suicidal – it’s definitely a positive thing. The moment I start s******* the bed is when you’ll see me on the front of a bus. I just want to look back and know that I’ve lived what I consider a fulfilled life.

They had more famous songs and videos, but I always considered this acidic commentary on the false nature of fame, consumerism, and the record industry to be the best of both.

UPDATE: RIP Luke Perry as well.

Luke Perry — the TV icon and heartthrob who rose to fame on “Beverly Hills, 90210” — has died after suffering a massive stroke 

Why conservatives always lose

I know John Hawkins means well, but his diagnostic ineptitude here is simply off the charts.

Exhibit 1: The first step to getting our culture to go back in the right direction is understanding why conservatives are losing the culture wars.

Exhibit 2: The “old school” values that made America successful were Judeo-Christian values that people were immersed in from their childhood on, usually in church. 

When you can’t identify the enemy, you cannot defeat the enemy. And when you cannot defeat the enemy, you are destined to lose. There are no “Judeo-Christian values”. There are no “Islamo-Christian”, “Hindu-Christian”, or “Satano-Christian values”.

Conservatives are losing the culture wars because they rejected the central role that Christianity and the posterity nation played in traditional American culture. So they permit non-American, non-Christian opinion leaders to lead them straight into cultural defeat, time and time again.

There are two primary causal factors: immigration and immoralization. Deal with them or go down to defeat.

The diversity imperative

Remember when I said the USA is going to lose its next major war? This USAF general is underlining my case:

Improving diversity and acceptance across the Air Force isn’t just about being politically correct, it’s a “warfighting imperative,” USAF Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said Friday.

Speaking to a room packed full of airmen at AFA’s Air Warfare Symposium, Goldfein said for himself and many leaders across the service, it can be hard to recognize issues other airmen face. These leaders need to accept that “we have blinders on as leaders,” and need to reach out to airmen from all backgrounds, races, genders, etc., to point out ways to improve.

“The only way we can see that is to surround ourselves and build teams in ways that others can point them out for us,” Goldfein said, adding that there needs to be a “big tent” culture of acceptance in the Air Force.

The decline and fall of the US empire is going to amuse and mystify historians for centuries, if not millennia. I’m feel as if I’m beginning to understand how Juvenal felt before writing his classic satires.

The conceptual weakness of conservativism

James Kirkpatrick explains why conservatives will never be able to even begin to successfully address the problem of corporate deplatforming:

Conservatism Inc. now at least recognizes deplatforming is an issue. Matt Schlapp of the American Conservative Union recently announced that a slot at CPAC will feature Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, who “will talk about the growing concerns around big tech companies and what Congress needs to do about it.” Hawley has questioned whether large tech companies should continue to benefit from the Section 230 protection in the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects social media platforms from being sued for user content.

Yet the ironic result of taking away this protection could be the destruction of small internet startups, ensuring that Facebook, Twitter and other large companies are the only ones who can maintain a large user base. Big Tech, of course, is entirely governed by the Left.

The larger problem: Conservatism Inc.’s dogma is preventing it from doing anything productive. There are two critical issues.

  • Conservatism Inc. won’t defend its own;
  • It won’t attack corporate power, even when that power is used in service of the Left.

Conservatism Inc.’s tradition of “purges” and selling out its own is well known and is arguably the defining characteristic of the movement. Thus it was less than a month ago the entire Republican Party threw Congressman Steve King under the bus because he was misquoted by the New York Times.

With online censorship, the temptation is to remain silent as the “unrespectable” elements are gradually deplatformed. Indeed, those who are not deplatformed actually benefit from the lack of any competition to their Right. Certainly, the “Never Trump true conservative” types would have rejoiced if Donald Trump’s Facebook account had been purged in 2015, as the company was reportedly considering. Indeed, journalists enforcers are still crusading to get President Trump banned from Twitter even now.

Even more serious: conservatives, because of their attachment to “free market principles,” are ideologically incapable of confronting the Leftist corporate power structure now called “Woke Capital”. Thus, at a time when populism is on the rise globally, American conservatives are in the idiotic position of trying to defend companies like Amazon from socialists like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, even while Amazon continues a crackdown on conservative speech.

At this point, anyone who focuses their rhetorical attacks on the faceless, unidentified “Left” should be considered suspect at the very least. It is more likely that they are simply unwilling and unable to face the reality of identity politics for one reason or another. The common conflation of corporations with capitalism, which is an intrinsically false notion due to the obvious and undeniable fact that corporations are artificial constructions of the government, is a conceptual trap into which most conservatives have fallen.

How is it “conservative” in any way, what does it conserve, to defend the rights of artificial constructs while absolving them from any responsibility for their actions?

The irony is that the very phenomenon of corporate deplatforming demonstrates that capitalist imperatives are not priorities for the modern post-capitalist corporation, because they do not rely upon the interactions of supply and demand for its profits, but rather, politically-driven access to the government-financial pool of resources.

Refusing to learn from history

How do the experts expect to be able to learn anything from history when political correctness prevents them from looking at the causal factors.

The first way to look at past civilisations is to compare their longevity. This can be difficult, because there is no strict definition of civilisation, nor an overarching database of their births and deaths.

In the graphic below, I have compared the lifespan of various civilisations, which I define as a society with agriculture, multiple cities, military dominance in its geographical region and a continuous political structure. Given this definition, all empires are civilisations, but not all civilisations are empires. The data is drawn from two studies on the growth and decline of empires (for 3000-600BC and 600BC-600), and an informal, crowd-sourced survey of ancient civilisations (which I have amended).

Collapse can be defined as a rapid and enduring loss of population, identity and socio-economic complexity. Public services crumble and disorder ensues as government loses control of its monopoly on violence.

Virtually all past civilisations have faced this fate. Some recovered or transformed, such as the Chinese and Egyptian. Other collapses were permanent, as was the case of Easter Island. Sometimes the cities at the epicentre of collapse are revived, as was the case with Rome. In other cases, such as the Mayan ruins, they are left abandoned as a mausoleum for future tourists.

What can this tell us about the future of global modern civilisation? Are the lessons of agrarian empires applicable to our post-18th Century period of industrial capitalism?

Collapse may be a normal phenomenon for civilisations, regardless of their size and technological stage

I would argue that they are. Societies of the past and present are just complex systems composed of people and technology. The theory of “normal accidents” suggests that complex technological systems regularly give way to failure. So collapse may be a normal phenomenon for civilisations, regardless of their size and stage.

We may be more technologically advanced now. But this gives little ground to believe that we are immune to the threats that undid our ancestors. Our newfound technological abilities even bring new, unprecedented challenges to the mix.

And while our scale may now be global, collapse appears to happen to both sprawling empires and fledgling kingdoms alike. There is no reason to believe that greater size is armour against societal dissolution. Our tightly-coupled, globalised economic system is, if anything, more likely to make crisis spread.

Read the article and notice what factors just happens to be omitted: immigration, identity politics, and foreign leadership. Now consider this description of the Crisis of the Third Century that nearly brought down the Roman Empire.

The Crisis of the Third Century was a period in which the Roman Empire nearly collapsed under the combined pressures of barbarian invasions and migrations into Roman territory, civil wars, peasant rebellions, political instability with multiple usurpers competing for power, growing influence and Roman reliance on barbarian mercenaries, and commanders nominally working for Rome, but increasingly independent, plague, debasement of currency, and economic depression. The crisis began with the assassination of Emperor Severus Alexander by his own troops in 235, initiating a 50-year period during which there were at least 26 claimants to the title of emperor, mostly prominent Roman army generals, who assumed imperial power over all or part of the Empire. The same number of men became accepted by the Roman Senate as emperor during this period and so became legitimate emperors.

By 268, the empire had split into three competing states. Later, Aurelian reunited the empire; the crisis ended with the ascension and reforms of Diocletian in 284. The crisis resulted in such profound changes in the empire’s institutions, society, economic life and, eventually, religion, that it is increasingly seen by most historians as defining the transition between the historical periods of classical antiquity and late antiquity.

Is this starting to sound familiar? Both the UK and the USA are empires with foreign leadership that has no love for the native populations over which it rules, and unlike the Jurchen tribe which created the Manchu Dynasty that ruled over the Han for 268 years, those that currently rule the two Western empires actively seek to destroy their historical culture, religion, and native peoples.

The end of the Avengers

It would appear someone is VERY upset at Disney, as the story for the big wrapup of the current version of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has leaked, according to Bounding Into Comics. Don’t read more if you don’t want to know what may, or may not, be the movie.

While creating their own Infinity Gauntlet presents challenges, they face even greater challenges in attempting to duplicate the Infinity Stones. Not only do they travel to some of the major events of the past films including Age of Ultron, Thanos discovers their plans and decides to hunt them down.

However, Doctor Strange saw this possibility and placed spells on the Time Stone that trap Thanos at the time of the first Avengers film during the Invasion of New York.

With Thanos trapped in the past and understanding the consequences of affecting the past, the Avengers continue to seek out the other Infinity Stones. They even visit the Ancient One to get their hands on the Time Stone.

They will also visit Valhalla as they seek out the Valkryie’s legion. Thor will even reunite with Odin and Frigga.

Their time traveling adventures will not be perfect. The Avengers will fail on numerous occasions forcing them to try different times to get their hands on the Infinity Stones.

The Avengers will eventually run into Captain Marvel during the third act, but her power has been significantly reduced to Thanos’ attack earlier in the movie.

Thanos will eventually confront the Avengers on Xandar. Thanos’ power is still near unstoppable. It takes all of the Avengers to hold him back while the Hulk attempts to bring back those who were wiped out by Thanos.

However, Hulk’s arm explodes before they are able to defeat Thanos. Captain America then takes control of the Infinity Gauntlet and uses it to defeat Thanos, but also bring back all of his fallen comrades and those who were wiped out by Thanos’ snap. However, his body can’t handle the power and he ends up disintegrating.

While Captain America brings back the Avengers who were wiped out by the snap, it does not appear he brings back Gamora. She supposedly remains dead.

Captain America’s sacrifice not only defeats Thanos, but it also destroys the Infinity Stones. However, with the destruction of the Infinity Stones, a cosmic entity is freed that will more than likely be the next major threat the Avengers will have to face.

The film ends with Captain America’s funeral and Tony Stark announcing his retirement.

The fact that the story involves killing off Captain America certainly gives it credibility. You know Disney wanted to do that above all else.

Puppies redux: Nebula edition

It was funny to read this in my inbox, as it was the first time I’ve had any reason to give a thought to SFWA in a long, long time. Possibly the most amusing thing about this latest SFWA kerfluffle is that it is a direct consequence of SFWA adopting my original campaign proposal to admit independent authors to the membership. Sad Puppy leader Brad Torgersen observes, with no little irony, the 2019 version of Sad Puppies:

This past week, some indie authors got on the Nebula ballot, and the taste-makers—many of whom are ardently “woke” political activists—began braying about how a “slate” had ramrodded these indie authors onto the sacred SFWA ballot, and how it was high treason against all things Good and Clean in the genre for *any* “slate” to influence the Nebula final selections.

Nevermind that magazines such as Locus have spent decades publishing “recommended” lists designed and published explicitly for the purpose of influencing both Nebula selection, and Hugo award selection, among others. Such “recommended” lists have been with the genre for a long time, and only now—mysteriously!—has it been deemed evil for such lists to exist. Provided those lists don’t originate from Correct™ sources, with Correct™ credentials, Correct™ political affiliation, and so forth.

Well, predictably, the indie authors came in for a caustic drubbing, and many of them—some being overseas, and not at all familiar with the internecine rhetorical warfare of American literary SF/F—were both angered and confused. And I can’t blame them. It’s difficult to properly unearth the many decades of political and elitist cultural battles which have saturated SF/F in America, and the larger Anglosphere SF/F lit scene, since at least the 1920s.

Suffice to say the whole thing is perhaps best explained through the lens of George Orwell’s landmark 1984. Where you have Inner Party, and Outer Party, and Proles.

Inner Party being comprised of long-time Super Fans (aka: “true fans”) and some venerable editors and authors who’ve labored carefully for years to take up positions of influence and prestige within SFWA, and the broader literary SF/F “establishment” as a whole. They are concerned almost
entirely with their own power and influence.

Outer Party being the newcomer political activist writers from the universities who see all of literary science fiction—and the Hugos and Nebulas, as well as other awards—as a tool for “woke” political activism. All of them aspire to Inner Party status, and are just waiting for the extant Inner Party to literally die off, so that the Outer Party members can graduate to places of Inner Party power and prestige.

And finally the rest of us inhabit the land of the Proles. Fans and authors who were never part of the establishment, and do not attend the so-called “World Science Fiction Convention” (which never was ‘world’ much, even when it went overseas) nor are we active SFWA members. Many of us are indie authors, or hybrids, who often make far more money and have far more readers than any three dozen SFWA trad pub members put together. But we still bear the stigma of self-publishing which is beyond the borders of establishment propriety in the eyes of the Inner Party.

So, when a “slate” created for and by Proles manages to get some Prole selections onto the ballot—which rightfully belongs to both the Inner and the Outer Party!—the Inner and Outer Party take it as an act of ART WAR! And as you know, Bob, nothing is more vicious than ART WAR!

And this meant it was time to launch the social media mobs, Twitter snipers, “woke” punditry, etc. In an effort to get the Proles kicked out of the process, or at least make the world aware of how horrible and evil it is that Proles stood up to be counted. Which Proles are never, EVER supposed to do. Ever. Proles are meant to mind their places in the hierarchy and not cause a fuss. We are to accept what the deciders of “worthy science fiction and fantasy” have declared for us this season, and learn to love Big Brother.

THAT is the state of American literary SF/F, in a nutshell. That is SFWA.

Which doesn’t make it any easier for indie authors or fans, much less indie authors or fans who don’t originate from U.S. soil. The whole thing can seem both ridiculous and conflicted. Which it is. Because any sane outsider looks at it all and does a W-T-F.

Try as they will to style themselves international, the Inner and Outer Party members of American literary SF/F are hopelessly provincial, sharing a painful overlap in ideology, as well as a kind of homogeneous, mushy globalist-liberal outlook. Which, being “woke”, puts a premium on demographics over individualism. Fetishizing ethnicities and sexualities. While remaining borderline-militant about a single-track monochrome political platform.

So, certain Inner and Outer Party folks proceeded to step all over their own unmentionables in an effort to “call out” the “slate” of the indie Proles from the dirty ghettos of indie publishing. And now the Inner and Outer Parties are in damage control mode (yet again!) trying to re-write events, submerge evidence, gaslight the actual victims of the literary pogrom, blame all evils on Emmanuel Goldstein (cough, Sad Puppies, cough) and crown themselves the Good People once more. Who would never, of course, do anything pernicious, because how could they? They are Good! They tell themselves they are Good all the time! They go out of their way to virtue-signal this Goodness on social media! It cannot be possible that they have done anything wrong!

Well, if you’ve seen the ugly carnival long enough, it’s easy to peer through the smog. And I am sorry for all of the Nebula nominees who—being rightfully excited to learn of their nominations—watched that excitement crumble beneath a digital tsunami of accusations and character assassination. I’ve been there. I remember the lies and slander. I know how it happens, and why.

Just shrug it off, and walk away. Neither SFWA, nor Worldcon, nor the Outer nor Inner Parties, have anything for you. They are not the audience, and never were. And the harder they try to enforce their own relevance, the more plain it becomes that this relevance has fatally degraded in the new century.

Meanwhile, no one seems to have noticed that both Tor and Baen are rapidly sliding towards nonexistence. I’ve heard that Macmillan is looking to get rid of Tor from several sources over the last three months. The changes you’ve seen in Castalia’s practices of late are the direct result of Amazon destroying the ebook publishing market, and those changes are hurting the traditional publishers a lot more than a company like Castalia that doesn’t rely as heavily upon the various channels.

The acid test is going to be in April. It’s going to be fascinating to see how well a book that is in very high demand does through the channel versus direct.

Disney to shut down Marvel

That’s the latest rumor to excite the non-stop drama of the comics industry:

A new rumor indicates that Disney might be shutting down Marvel Comics sooner rather than later.

The rumor comes from Jude Terror at Bleeding Cool who cites a press release from Marvel Comics indicating that Marvel’s Editor-in-Chief C.B. Cebulski and Joe Quesada are heading down to Austin, Texas to discuss the importance of comics to Disney’s business based off the Marvel intellectual properties.

In fact, Terror speculates that Cebulski and Quesada are heading to Austin, Texas to save Marvel Comics because “comics must continue to be published even if they add little value to the budget on their own simply because they provide the genetic material to make actual profits elsewhere.”

Terror even questions, “If less people are buying comics and the direct market is on the verge of collapse, then why should a megacorp like Disney continue to bother publishing them at all, especially when they can make far more money mining the intellectual properties for other mediums?”

Terror’s speculation isn’t anything new. Thom Pratt at The Kingdom Insider speculated about Disney cutting out Marvel Comics back in 2017.

Pratt notes that Disney’s entire profit on an entire year of Marvel Comics amounts to what they make “off one single Marvel Studios movie.” He bluntly writes, “Comic book sales look absolutely pathetic compared to an MCU release.”

Pratt who has his own sources at Disney even stated that “comic books have about as much value to Disney right now as a T-shirt.” In fact, he states it might even be less because “T-shirts have a higher profit margin.”

Pratt even addresses the idea that the comics are needed to mine for future stories in movies, video games, and other genres.

He quickly refutes this writing, “The MCU has taken characters and concepts in a totally different direction than the comic books, and Disney could easily hire away the best “idea guys” to work directly for Marvel Studios.”

Pratt predicts that Marvel Comics as a publisher will be done away with. He sees it existing in some form but being an “office full of brand managers overseeing licensed deals.” He even believes that Disney will license out the Marvel superheroes to other publishers similar to what they do with their Disney characters to IDW and Dark Horse.

Part of Pratt’s prediction has already come true as Disney has licensed their Marvel superheroes to IDW.

I’m a bit dubious about this, as the continuing decline in comics sales was not quite as bad as I expected in 2018, although the more profitable sales of graphics novels did collapse. According to Comichron, the top 300 graphic novel dollar sales declined 16.5 percent last year, to $73.6 million, but top 300 comic dollars increased $10.7 million despite a three percent decline in units as a result of the rise in the average comic price to $4.19.

The fact that the MCU cycle is coming to an end and Captain Marvel looks to be a complete bust suggests that if 2018 was bad, 2019 will be considerably worse. But Marvel isn’t suffering as much as its lesser competitors, as it actually increased its unit market share from 40.4 percent to 44 percent and is still bringing in revenue of well over $100 million, though it may not be doing so profitably.

It would be amusing if Disney offered Arkhaven the opportunity to license any of its characters, although I can’t imagine we’d be terribly interested in cultural icons such as Lesbian Meth Batgirl, Thorella, She-Wolverine, or Shade, Marvel’s First Superhero Drag Queen. In any event, Arkhaven’s support is continuing to grow steadily and we expect to have a series of exciting new announcements in the coming three months. In related news, the gold logo edition of AH#6 will be available from Castalia Direct next week.

Note: the new standard size introduced with the gold logo edition of Chuck Dixon’s Avalon #3 meant that we did not know exactly how the pricing would translate to the Castalia Direct store. Our first estimate worked out to a price of $3.14 in practice. However, we have since adjusted that, so the $2.99 retail price will return on April 1 and will be maintained across the Arkhaven line for standard size series comics.

This video by the Kingdom Insider, who is very familiar with Disney’s customary practices, is extremely informative. Key phrase: “To the Walt Disney company, the real Marvel universe to them is the Marvel universe they created. The movies. The movies have basically replaced the comic books.”

This article by a comic book retailer is pertinent, especially this statistical truth-bomb:

The January 2019 order form features 1106 solicited periodical comic books. Of those, only 454 of those SKUs are new items – the other 652 are variant covers. That means a staggering fifty-nine percent of all solicited comics are actually variants. That’s completely and entirely absurd! It is deluded, it is dangerous, and it actively works against the best interests of the market.

That’s why our only variant covers will be the Premium editions intended for the comic book stores. We’ll do the gold logo limited editions for the collectors, but we’re keeping our price at $2.99 for those. Remember that at 24 pages of story, our comics are not only less expensive and better-constructed, but provide considerably more content than the average Marvel or DC floppy.

Mailvox: dealing with SJWs

A reader writes concerning the outcome of her decision to take action with the family SJW:

I wrote to you a little while ago, detailing some of the pain and agony my SJW sibling had put our family thru in the last year, and you advised us to dump her, saying that it wasn’t worth it.  So we had dumped her locally recently, holding family events just with our adult children and grandchildren, and they’ve been delightful and relaxing.

But I was concerned about when my elderly parents return from [REDACTED] this spring and felt we’d have to go back to the SJW abuse for their sake. I’ve been thinking since your note, and had a talk with my dad this week, and we reviewed the history with sibling, including my family’s behavior (which my dad feels has been pretty exemplary), and he pretty cheerfully agreed that our family should do things separately from sibling at this point.

He’s at a loss, because he says SJW never listens to anything he tries to tell her, and hasn’t for years, but he also doesn’t believe that we should be treated so badly, including our adult children. I wish she could get a different perspective that values family over politics, but she has a history of bad decision making, and I am just really relieved that we can look forward to a summer that is positive and relaxing when my parents return, that we won’t be baited, ambushed, sabotaged or abused at my parents’ home, and that my parents see the situation and appreciate what we’ve been through with her. Anyway, thanks so much for your straightforward advice and encouragement.

I don’t take the idea of excising a family member, or an entire branch of the family, from one’s life lightly. But it is precisely because family is so important that it is vital to excise serial bad actors from the family without regret, because they have a reliably destructive effect on everyone in the family.

If a family member makes it clear that they have no interest in maintaining familial harmony, or simply refuses to behave in a civil manner, then one should not hesitate to leave them to their priorities and exclude them from family activities. They have already made their choice, one is simply honoring it and permitting them to experience its consequences.

The prodigal son would not have learned from his experience had his father not permitted him to reach rock bottom and repent. Enabling an abusive family member is not helping them, to the contrary, it is complicity in their abuse.

Please note that that notwithstanding this singular email exchange, I am not beginning a career as an advice columnist. Since I am not an advice columnist, I simply ignore the vast majority of emails sent to me seeking advice. I do macro, not micro, and to the extent that I ever offer micro advice, it tends to be considerably more brutal and succinct than you are likely to be seeking.

Why the Left is dead

And why Identity has replaced Ideology:

It seems that there is not much left of the Left and what remains has nothing to do with ‘Left.’

Contemporary ‘Left’ politics is detached from its natural constituency, working people. The so called ‘Left’ is basically a symbolic identifier for ‘Guardian readers’ a critical expression attributed to middle class people who, for some reason, claim to know what is good for the working class. How did this happen to the Left? Why was it derailed and by whom?

The British Labour party is a prime example of this. It is deaf to the cry of the lower classes. It claims to care ‘for the many’ but in practice is only attentive to a few voices within the intrusive Israeli Lobby. As Britain is struggling with the crucial debate over Brexit, British Labour has been focused instead on spurious allegations of ‘antisemitsm.’ It is hard to see how any Left political body in the West even plans to bring more work to the people. The Left offers nothing in the way of a vision of a better society for all. It is impossible to find the Left within the contemporary ‘Left.’

Why has this happened to the Left, why has it become irrelevant? Because by now the Left is a non-hierarchical system. It is an amalgam of uniquely ungifted people who made politics into their ‘career.’ Most Left politicians have never worked at a proper job where money is exchanged for merit, achievements or results. The vast majority of Left politicians have never faced the economic challenges associated with the experience of being adults. Tragically such people can’t lead a country, a city, a borough or even a village.

The Left had a mostly positive run for about 150 years. But its role has come to an end as the condition of being in the world has been radically transformed. The Left failed to adapt. It removed itself from the universal ethos.

In the same way the Left no longer represents the native working class, the “conservatives” of the West no longer conserve. We now live in a post-ideological multinational societies where competing interest groups struggle for the reins of imperial power in order to best benefit their self-perceived interests.

This is nothing new. This is the way that Man has lived for most of his history. The sooner the Right accepts the new/old reality and adapts to it, the more successful it will be. Because there are a lot of people practicing identity politics who are working very hard at trying to steer the Right away from defending national interests.

The Republican Party and I think conservatism in general is also going through a lot of internal debates about what — what it should be, right, what it should be—the sort of position of the party. And I think that’s one that we should be involved in because we, I think, probably want to steer conservatives and Republicans more towards a message of liberty and freedom and away from the more nationalistic incendiary nativist comments and things like that.
—Adam Kovacevic, Head of U.S. public policy, Google