70 is the new 40!

The Baby Boomers are at it again. See, even at 70 they are young, sexy, cool, and fun!

This is a year of big birthdays, for, believe it or not, 2017 is when the baby boomer turns 70. Ever-youthful Joanna Lumley, Bill Clinton and Cher are 70 already and are now joined by a million new septuagenarians this year — more than ever before. To mark this, Channel 4 has a new four-part TV series called The Baby Boomers’ Guide To Growing Old. Its aim? To show just how young 70 really is.

The baby boomers have always been rule breakers. Born in peacetime, with the freedom to enjoy the Sixties’ summer of love, they’re now completely redefining ‘old age’. They may be doting grandparents, but they’re also going to music festivals, travelling the globe, wearing skinny jeans, remodelling their houses and feeling fitter and healthier than they’ve ever been.

(rolls eyes) To think they can’t figure out why everyone younger despises them. But why, when they are “redefining old age”? And, apparently, the concept of “doting”.

At this point, you’d think they’d be getting embarrassed by their generational narcissism. The funny thing is that they are so self-absorbed that they don’t even realize how ridiculous they are. I mean, did you see a single article about Generation X proclaiming “40 is the new 20”? For that matter, did you ever see a single article about Generation X turning any age at all?

Of course not. Because we’re not a generation of attention-craving buffoons.

EXCERPT: QM-AMD

An excerpt from QUANTUM MORTIS: A Man Disrupted


Murder is the unlawful killing of a sentient corporeal being rated higher than 9 on the Takeno-Turing scale, with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by radiation, genetic manipulation, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any revolution, assassination, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture, is murder in the first degree and is strictly prohibited without the written consent of an appropriate authority. Any other murder is murder in the second degree.
—09 RCJ § 1111: Murder

“Chief Tower? Chief Graven Tower? Is that you?”

He could hear the incredulity in the detector’s voice as she addressed him and grinned to himself as he stood up from where he’d been attempting to examine some of the possible sight lines that Baby was displaying for him.

“None other.” He pretended not to know who it was. “Wait, I know that voice. Hildy, is that you?”

“None other. Now get your grubby mitts off my murder scene! I’m right over you.”

Tower craned his head upward. Sure enough, a black-and-white TPPD aerovar was descending slowly with its nose pointing north, having come from the opposite direction. “You got your zoom on if you can see my hands from up there.”

“Your augment sent me the uplink through Victor when I asked why there was a soldier boy crashing the scene.”

“So the kids are playing well together? Isn’t that nice. Get on down here and join the party. I think you’re going to like this one.”

“Not a jumper?”

“Not a jumper,” he confirmed. “Definitely not a jumper.”

“Well, where is the body? I don’t see a body. You didn’t do anything with my body, did you, Chief?”

Tower shook his head, and with some difficulty, managed to stifle the first three responses that sprang into his mind. Was she flirting with him? He was tempted to respond in kind, and he knew how unlikely it was that anyone downtown or at base was listening in, but regardless, they were being recorded and it was only two months since the last base-wide series of sexual harassment lectures.

He shuddered involuntarily. No woman, not even the lovely Detector Hildreth, was worth the interminable weeks of re-education that would follow an on-duty comment deemed improper by Bio Resources. The suspicious bureaucrats of BR were always on the alert, they liked nothing better than to get their hands on an officer, and they could always be relied upon to put the worst possible interpretation on even the most innocent remark.

“Not guilty, Detector.” He cursed himself for his cowardice and glanced into a window that was just clean enough to let him see his reflection. Thanks to the tac-jacket, he looked dangerous, maybe even dashing. Digging into his pocket, he found a breath-enhancement pill and popped it into his mouth. “Tower out.”

The signal clicked off. Tower swore it was an actual sound, but the techs told him he was over-imaginative. A moment later, the whine of the grav-plates on Detector Hildreth’s aerovar increased in pitch as she, or more likely, her augment parked it on the street, nose to nose with Tower’s own vehicle. Lacking the armor, the anti-personnel rockets, the Meteor air-to-air missiles, the 15mm gun ports under the stub-wing slots on either side, and the pair of Degroet Tactical M165-20 cannons in the nose, her black-and-white vehicle looked sleek and stylishly feminine in comparison with his more heavily armed, dark-grey machine.

“Well, Chief Tower, it seems we meet again. What brings MCID to this humble civilian crime scene?” Derin Hildreth, Hildy to her friends, colleagues, and one-time professional role-play team members, was a little shorter than Tower. She was pretty, slender, and athletic, and wore a thicker, sleeveless version of his tactical jacket. A standard department GHK slug-thrower rested in a brown leather holster that was slung low over her grey pants, and a yellow-triggered shocker that looked like a toy was attached to her belt on her right hip. Underneath the tactical vest she was wearing a white collared shirt. She had a small black satchel slung over one shoulder, and was using both hands to twist her medium-length blond hair back into a looped ponytail as she walked toward him.

“Would you believe an inter-subsector war looms on the horizon and solving this crime may help us stop it and save tens of millions of lives?”

“Not even a little bit,” she said with a grin. Then the amusement vanished from her face as she stared at the dark smear on the ground. “Oh, no. That’s from a military grade disintegrator. That’s why you’re here, isn’t it! Don’t tell me you guys have something that can pick up the discharge!”

Wow, she was quick. She was wrong, but she was quick.

“If we did, you know I can’t tell you.” Tower spread his hands. “And, just so you know, we usually refer to them as disruptors.”

She narrowed her eyes, which he couldn’t help notice were an attractively bright shade of green and glanced at his armored var. “Do you have it in there? Chief, if you have evidence that would help me ID the weapon, I would truly appreciate it. I really would.”

“She’s just shameless, isn’t she?” Baby practically hissed as Hildy patted his arm and started to slide past him. “What are you doing, Tower? Change the subject!”

She was right. He had to distract the detector and fast. Hildy was already making her way toward the driver-side door and he couldn’t remember if he’d locked it or not. Then she froze and cocked her head to one side. She was listening to her augment, he realized. Then she turned around to face him.

“Victor says there is a ninety-seven percent possibility that the vic was killed by a disintegrator given the chemical composition of the latent energy particles. Or rather, a disruptor, I should say.”

Tower tried to nod in a knowing manner, hoping that Hildy wouldn’t press him further about his nonexistent device.

Did you do that? he subvocalized, knowing that Baby could hear him.

“Yeah, I cycled it through the TPPD comm-int; her Victor has no idea where it came from. Those civilian intelligences are cretins.”


That’s my girl.

He glanced up and realized that Hildy had her hands on her hips and was asking him something.

“Did I smell anything when we got here? No, I didn’t, but I’ve seen that sort of thing before.” He indicated the crude body-shaped smear. “The Keleboshi had a few vehicle-mounted disruptors. They burned through too much energy to be relied upon in a firefight, and their power sources were too big to carry around without a gravsuit, but for a one-shot kill, a micro-disruptor is hard to beat if you can get close enough to your target.”

“You’re a combat vet?” She looked up at him with a speculative look on her face.

“I saw a bit of drama here and there. Among other things, I was with the security detail on Basattria.”

“Wow,” she said. Eleven years later, even civilians still remembered what went down at the consulate on that godforsaken planet. “Talk about being at the wrong place at the wrong time! I didn’t know there were any survivors.”

“A few of us got out. Not enough.” He shrugged and firmly kept his thoughts away from the one individual in particular who hadn’t. “The point is, we know what the weapon was, probably, but we don’t know why or even who, yet. And Baby tells me that based on what the witness says he didn’t see, the killer may have been cloaked.”

“Cloaked? That doesn’t sound like a run-of-the-mill mugger. Neither does a disruptor.” She took him by surprise when she raised her eyebrows and grinned hopefully. “I thought I heard a ‘we’ in there, Chief Tower. Would MCID be willing to assist on this one instead of taking over the investigation?”

“Oh, for the love of Our Father, Tower, are you really going to hold her hand on this one?”


Shut up, Baby. We could be dealing with pros here, maybe even spec-ops. It’s legitimate, you know TPPD isn’t equipped to handle spooks or soldiers. Just make the request.

He shrugged and feigned indifference. “We’ll see about that. Let’s find out who our vic was first.”

Posterity: TK vs VD

As you probably know, my argument is that the Posterity for whom the Constitution is intended to defend the Blessings of Liberty consists solely of the genetic descendants of the People of the several and united States. Posterity does not include immigrants, descendants of immigrants, invaders, conquerers, tourists, students, Americans born in Portugal, or anyone else who happens to subsequently reside in the same geographic location, or share the same civic ideals, as the original We the People.

Tom Kratman, as part of his series on Civic Nationalism, took a very different stance in an essay entitled Ourselves and Our Posterity. He claims that in this particular case, “our posterity” means nothing more than “succeeding generations”. Read the whole thing, it’s not an incompetent case, merely an incorrect one. Not only that, but he also claims that the alternative definition to which I subscribe, “actual legal descendants and heirs”, is “utter nonsense”. He wrote:

I’m not sloppy Vox, you’re just wrong, your genetically based posterity argument utter nonsense, start to finish.


He also added, rather confidently, that he can match me IQ point for IQ point.


Vox, since you set store by it, I can match you IQ point for IQ point. Yes, I can… Once again. you have a word in the preamble which doesn’t carry it’s own definition. The dictionaries of the day do not help you, because they use three definitions. Within the document, itself, you have clear, absolutely unambiguous evidence that they intended immigration and naturalization because they provided from immigrants to eventually, within their lifetimes, be able to hold any elective office in the land but one. You have the 1790 act, which is commentary on the intent, but not actually necessary because the constitution itself, as mentioned above, provides for the ability of naturalized citizens to become senators and reps. ANd then there is the problem of omission. I mentioned Hobbes in my first post in this thread. Why? I mentioned it because he had translated Thucydides 148 or so years before the revolution; they had that in their libraries, and so they knew about more restrictive – genetic posterity-based – rules for citizenship and neglected to use them. Would have been easy. Didn’t bother. Did, once again, put in provisions for non-genetically based citizens in the highest office.

Now, I don’t mind people calling me out. It adds a certain flavor to the discourse. The problem, however, is that one’s ability to match me in the decathalon is irrelevant when the contest concerned is the 100-meter dash. This is particularly relevant if you happen to know that I can’t pole vault over my own height. As I warned Tom, his case is an eminently reasonable one, but it is a purely logical argument of the sort preferred by lawyers, the very sort of argument that reliably fails when the relevant evidence is examined. As with many an economic model, Tom’s case relies upon imputing a false rationality and coherence to the behavior of all-too-often irrational and self-contradictory human beings. I could come up with a dozen alternative explanations to his logical conundrum, but I won’t bother, because I have a considerably more effective response to offer.

The question is this: how do we determine which of the three definitions of posterity should correctly apply to the term “posterity” as it is used in “ourselves and our posterity”? The answer, as I previously suggested, is straightforward. To understand how the term was meant to be understood in the Preamble, we must look at how the same people using it were using it in their other writings. Fortunately, there are more than a few mentions of “posterity” in both the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers which are discussing the very constitution in question. There are seven instances in the Federalist Papers.

  1. To this manly spirit, posterity will be indebted for the possession, and the world for the example, of the numerous innovations displayed on the American theatre, in favor of private rights and public happiness. (DEFINITION 3: future history)
  2. In framing a government for posterity as well as ourselves, we ought, in those provisions which are designed to be permanent, to calculate, not on temporary, but on permanent causes of expense. (DEFINITION 3: future history)
  3. This dependence, and the necessity of being bound himself, and his posterity, by the laws to which he gives his assent, are the true, and they are the strong chords of sympathy between the representative and the constituent. (DEFINITION 1: descendants)
  4. WE, THE PEOPLE of the United States, to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ORDAIN and ESTABLISH this Constitution for the United States of America. (TBD)
  5. No partial motive, no particular interest, no pride of opinion, no temporary passion or prejudice, will justify to himself, to his country, or to his posterity, an improper election of the part he is to act. (DEFINITION 1: descendants)
  6. …upon Congress, as they are now constituted; and either the machine, from the intrinsic feebleness of its structure, will moulder into pieces, in spite of our ill-judged efforts to prop it; or, by successive augmentations of its force an energy, as necessity might prompt, we shall finally accumulate, in a single body, all the most important prerogatives of sovereignty, and thus entail upon our posterity one of the most execrable forms of government that human infatuation ever contrived. (TBD)
  7. Whence could it have proceeded, that the Athenians, a people who would not suffer an army to be commanded by fewer than ten generals, and who required no other proof of danger to their liberties than the illustrious merit of a fellow-citizen, should consider one illustrious citizen as a more eligible depositary of the fortunes of themselves and their posterity, than a select body of citizens, from whose common deliberations more wisdom, as well as more safety, might have been expected? (DEFINITION 1: descendants)
Note that the distinction between “posterity”, used in the sense of future history, and “his posterity” and “their posterity”, used in the sense of direct genetic descendants. This suggests that “our posterity” is also meant to be understood in the case of the latter. Also note that none of the seven examples are clearly instances of Definition 2: succeeding generations with the possible exceptions of 2 and 6. But there is considerably more evidence to consider. Now let’s turn to the Anti-Federalist Papers.
  • Therefore, a general presumption that rulers will govern well is not a sufficient security. — You are then under a sacred obligation to provide for the safety of your posterity, and would you now basely desert their interests, when by a small share of prudence you may transmit to them a beautiful political patrimony, that will prevent the necessity of their travelling through seas of blood to obtain that, which your wisdom might have secured. -Anti-Federalist No. 5, 
  • The first thing I have at heart is American liberty; the second thing is American union; and I hope the people of Virginia will endeavor to preserve that union. The increasing population of the Southern States is far greater than that of New England; consequently, in a short time, they will be far more numerous than the people of that country. Consider this, and you will find this state more particularly interested to support American liberty, and not bind our posterity by an improvident relinquishment of our rights. – Anti-Federalist No. 34, The Problem of Concurrent Taxation
  • Rouse up, my friends, a matter of infinite importance is before you on the carpet, soon to be decided in your convention: The New Constitution. Seize the happy moment. Secure to yourselves and your posterity the jewel Liberty, which has cost you so much blood and treasure, by a well regulated Bill of Rights, from the encroachments of men in power. For if Congress will do these things in the dry tree when their power is small, what won’t they do when they have all the resources of the United States at their command? – Anti-Federalist No. 13, The Expense of the New Government
Notice in No. 34 the way a distinction is made between Virginia’s posterity and the posterity of the 12 other States. This makes it very clear that “our posterity” refers, specifically and solely, to direct genetic descendants and no one else. Furtheremore, there are other relevant examples from the era that underline the same point.
  • We have counted the cost of this contest and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. Honor, justice, and humanity forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us.  – DECLARATION OF TAKING UP ARMS: RESOLUTIONS OF THE SECOND CONTINENTAL CONGRESS JULY 6, 1775
  • They were governed by counts, sent them by the kings of Oviedo and Leon, until 859, when finding themselves without a chief, because Zeno, who commanded them, was made prisoner, they rose and took arms to resist Ordogne, son of Alfonsus the Third, whose domination was too severe for them, chose for their chief an issue of the blood-royal of Scotland, by the mother’s side, and son-in-law of Zeno their governor, who having overcome Ordogne, in 870, they chose him for their lord, and his posterity, who bore afterwards the name of Haro, succeeded him, from father to son, until the king Don Pedro the Cruel, having put to death those who were in possession of the lordship, reduced them to a treaty, by which they united their country, under the title of a lordship, with Castile, by which convention the king of Spain is now lord of.  – John Adams, Letter IV, Biscay
  • That mankind have a right to bind themselves by their own voluntary acts, can scarcely be questioned: but how far have they a right to enter into engagements to bind their posterity likewise? Are the acts of the dead binding upon their living posterity, to all generations; or has posterity the same natural rights which their ancestors have enjoyed before them? And if they have, what right have any generation of men to establish any particular form of government for succeeding generations? The answer is not difficult: “Government,” said the congress of the American States, in behalf of their constituents, “derives its just authority from the consent of the governed.” This fundamental principle then may serve as a guide to direct our judgment with respect to the question. To which we may add, in the words of the author of Common Sense, a law is not binding upon posterity, merely, because it was made by their ancestors; but, because posterity have not repealed it. It is the acquiescence of posterity under the law, which continues its obligation upon them, and not any right which their ancestors had to bind them. – BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE, TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS, OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES; AND OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, 1803
First, posterity is directly tied to “ancestors”. Therefore, it means “descendants”. Second, “his posterity” means succession from “father to son” of men bearing the same name. Therefore, it means “descendants”. Third, posterity is again directly tied to ancestors and it is specifically distinguished from “succeeding generations”. In fact, the former is used as potential justification for the latter. Therefore, again, posterity means “descendants”. In fact, it is the first definition of posterity, which Tom incorrectly described as “utter nonsense, start to finish”, that is the only possible definition applicable. Therefore, my case for “ourselves and our posterity” referring solely to direct genetic descendants is not merely correct, it is conclusive.

Finally, Tom appealed to the fact that the Founding Fathers had Hobbes in their libraries. But they had John Locke in their libraries as well. And Locke’s reference to posterity not only underlines my case, but deals a fatal blow to the false notion that immigrants and invaders and other pretenders can ever stake a rightful claim to the Blessings of Liberty intended by the American Revolutionaries for their direct genetic descendants.

  • No damage therefore, that men in the state of nature (as all princes and governments are in reference to one another) suffer from one another, can give a conqueror power to dispossess the posterity of the vanquished, and turn them out of that inheritance, which ought to be the possession of them and their descendants to all generations. The conqueror indeed will be apt to think himself master: and it is the very condition of the subdued not to be able to dispute their right. But if that be all, it gives no other title than what bare force gives to the stronger over the weaker: and, by this reason, he that is strongest will have a right to whatever he pleases to seize on. – John Locke, Of Conquest, Second Treatise on Civil Government, 1690

Kraonomics

It occurs to me that we’re going to need a new name for this debt-based economics that is gradually coming to the intellectual fore. And we’re going to need an introductory book to it, given that Steve Keen’s severing of the link between micro and macro renders almost completely irrelevant all those Robinson Crusoe stories meant to illuminate the first foundations of the microeconomy.

Everything you know about economics is wrong. Also, everything the professional economists know about economics is wrong.


That may sound arrogant. That may sound crazy. It is certainly a very strong statement. Nevertheless, it is true, because math does not lie.


You see, professional economists make one single very important assumption that underlies their entire profession. This one assumption underlies all of their models, all of their statistics, and all of their fundamental understanding of their studies of human action. They assume that demand is cumulative. What that means is that they assume your preferences, and my preferences, and everyone else’s preferences, can be added together to make one giant set of preferences which can then be utilised in their calculations.


Or, to put it in a way that those of you with an economic background will recognize, they assume that all individual demand curves are a) stackable and b) follow the same downward-sloping trajectory.


As it happens, this is not true. What is more, this has been known to not be true since 1974.


Of course, it would be excessively brutal to follow that up by dropping the Sonnenschein–Mantel–Debreu theorem on them without warning and a considerable amount of explanation.

I have elected to call this debt-based economics “kraonomics”, from the Greek χρέος, or chréos, which means “debt, duty, indebtedness”. Why that particular spelling? For one, English-speakers will instinctively read the pronunciation correctly. For two, never use accents when you can avoid it. For three, as Psykosonik fans are aware, I always prefer using a “k” to a hard “c” or “ch”. And for four, it suggests just a hint of the chaos theory that it almost certainly requires.

On a tangential note, I wonder how many people noticed perhaps the most intellectually exciting note of the recent Brainstorm with Steve Keen. The professor mentioned, almost off-hand, that he was currently reading the work of one Robert Prechter. It strikes me that whatever comes out of the meeting of those two brilliant minds is almost guaranteed to be significant, revolutionary, and mind-blowing.

Just for starters, it may well be that outstanding private debt is a more useful metric for measuring social mood than the stock markets.

Access journalism and fake news

The Zman explains the link between the two:

It has been thrown down the memory hole, but Jordan decided the way to help black sports reporters was to give them exclusive access and deny access to honkies. Guys like Ahmad Rashad and Michael Wilbon were given special access. This made their careers, but it also ushered in the era of access journalism. Players granted access to reporters who were willing to sing their praises in their columns and on TV shows.

Something similar happened around the same time in Washington politics. The Clinton machine was ruthless in controlling the media. They would shutout reporters that did not play ball. There’s always been some of this, as people are naturally going to be nice to those who are nice to them and not so nice to people they see as adversaries. The difference was, the Clinton team turned this into a formal policy and the Washington press corp went along with it. They liked being treated like players so they acted accordingly.

The Bush people could not play the same game, as the Washington media is universally liberal, but they did a little bit of it with operations like Fox and the talk radio guys. Rich Lowry of National Review remodeled the magazine to be a GOP mouth piece for exactly this reason. It gave them access to Republicans. The Weekly Standard largely existed as a public relations vehicle for the Bush family. Much of what has gone wrong with Buckley Conservatism is due to the perils of access journalism.

This is why we see the explosion of fake news. The NBA guys want access or at least the illusion of access. To that end, they tweet out rumors and fake news in the hope of getting a reply from an agent or front office guy. That way they can then shoot down their own rumor or fake news with an actual quote from a real person. “After talking with person X, I can now report that the rumor I reported is false.” Fake news about rumors produces gossip that is eventually addressed by a real person in the news.

That seems to be what’s going on Washington with all the fake news. No one in the Washington media bothered to develop contacts in the Trump team. Instead, they mocked and harassed them through the campaign, figuring they were currying favor with the Clinton people. Now, they have no access so they create fake stories hoping to get a response from the Trump people. In lieu of real reporting, it is provocative fake reporting in the hope of gaining access to real people in the Trump White House.

This is all pretty much news to me, but it’s as explanatory as anything else I’ve heard suggested. Personally, I find it a little strange that Fake News has exploded at the very time that it has never been easier for the average individual to do a little looking around the Internet to debunk it.

The cost of virtue signaling

Some people were feeling sorry for a musician who had a $6k guitar destroyed. Then they found out what happened:

For those of you who do not know we took in 4 Dominican Republic students for the summer. We went through the Houston Embassy and United Travel out of San Marcos Texas. That is who we believe did all this damage to our personal property. With that being said here are the accounts of what happened the last few days……..We called the police after finding quite a bit vandalism damage to the interior of our house. In our front foyer we noticed all of our eyes blackened out in our family picture wall to include our 4 children by a permanent marker symbolizing a voodoo curse put upon our home and children.

Next was a precious moments preacher collectable taken from the back of the curio cabinet collection of about 150 figurines with its head ripped off and purposely set in plain sight on the kitchen table for all to see. Only one was pulled out and had its head ripped out..”The Preacher”. The only religious figurine in the bunch.

Next was our cabinet door in the kitchen ripped out from the wall. Digging further the washer was marked up with permanent marker. We then noticed permanent marker scribbled on the outside of my acoustic guitar. We then opened the case and found my most precious thing that i own. My limited edition signature cut- away Doyle Dykes Taylor was smashed and put back in its place very meticulously. At the time of the police interview in our house. The police stated he felt all of the boys were being deceitful. Their stories were not matching up.

In conclusion prior discussions with the boys on there rent being too high for them and all of there other friends are paying $325 a month. They wanted their rent reduced to what their friends were paying. I did not move on the rent discussion but i did reduce to paying for their laundry down to zero. Again they stated all of there friends are getting laundry included in there rent of $325.

As far as we are concerned they can leave or transfer to another location at their own expense. No money will be returned to any of them. One of them or all of them vandalized my house. They all deny it!!…i blame them all and no one gets any money back or any of their deposit. We prefer they get out asap at their own expense. If they do not leave i will file in court on Monday an “Emergency Exparte” to have them physically taken out of our home by police force siting we are in fear for our safety and our children’s safety.

Reality will always eventually intrude, no matter how firmly you are determined to believe in unicorns. Or equality.

They broke their oaths

Oathkeepers are no more keeping their oaths to defend the American Constitution and thereby secure the Blessings of Liberty to the posterity of the People of the United States than conservatives have conserved anything.

Rich @itswildrich
White Nationalism – the radically “racist” idea that Whites have a right to preserve their homelands and culture. Just like everybody else.

Oath Keepers‏ @Oathkeepers
That is NOT what white nationalism is all about. They advocate ‘saving’ their race at expense of harming innocents; i.e. anyone not white.

Supreme Dark Lord‏ @voxday  now
Why do you support the elimination of American posterity? A nation is a people, not borders or an idea. You have failed your oaths.

They have broken their oaths. They are rightly dismissed with contempt as “Oathcuckers”. They may not like to hear that, but it is obvious to anyone who understands the purpose of the Constitution they are sworn to uphold.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Posterity is not an idea. Posterity is not geography. Posterity is not paperwork. Posterity is descendance and DNA. Far too many U.S. citizens today are no more the posterity of We the People than they are of the Iroquois, the Cherokee, or the Mohicans, whose ancestral lands they now inhabit.

A dangerous game in Syria

Fortunately, the Russians aren’t biting as the US attempts to slow down the Syrian army’s destruction of ISIS and reclamation of its territory. The Saker explains the dynamic.

The dynamic in Syria is not fundamentally different from the dynamic in the Ukraine: the Neocons know that they have failed to achieve their primary objective: to control the entire country. They also know that their various related financial schemes have collapsed. Finally, they are fully aware that they owe this defeat to Russia and, especially, to Vladimir Putin. So they fell back on plan B. Plan B is almost as good as Plan A (full control) because Plan B has much wider consequences. Plan B is also very simple: trigger a major crisis with Russia but stay short from a full-scale war. Ideally, Plan B should revolve around a “firm” “reaction” to the Russian “aggression” and a “defense” of the US “allies” in the region. In practical terms this simply means: get the Russians to openly send forces into Novorussia or get the Russians to take military actions against the US or its allies in Syria. Once you get this you can easily see that the latest us attacks in Syria have a minor local purpose – to scare or slow down the Syrians- and a major global purpose – to bait the Russians into using forces against the US or an ally. It bears repeating here that what the Neocons really want is what I call a “tepid” war with Russia: an escalation of tensions to levels not even seen during the Cold War, but not a full-scale “hot” WWIII either. A tepid war would finally re-grant NATO at least some kind of purpose (to protect “our European friends and allies” from the “Russian threat”): the already terminally spineless EU politicians would all be brought into an even more advanced state of subservience, the military budgets would go even higher and Trump would be able to say that he made “America” “great” again. And, who knows, maybe the Russian people would *finally* rise against Putin, you never know! (They wouldn’t – but the Neocons have never been deterred from their goofy theories by such minor and altogether irrelevant things as facts or logic).

Does the Russian strategy work?

To reply to this, don’t look at what the Russians do or do not do in the immediate aftermath of a US provocation. Take a higher level look and just see what happens in the mid to long term. Just like in a game of chess, taking the Gambit is not always the correct strategy.

I submit that to evaluate whether Putin’s policies are effective or not, to see whether he has “sold out” or “caved in” you need to, for example, look at the situation in Syria (or the Ukraine, for that matter) as it was 2 years ago and then compare with what it is today. Or, alternatively, look at the situation as it is today and come back to re-visit it in 6 months.

One huge difference between the western culture and the way the Russians (or the Chinese for that matter) look at geostrategy is that westerners always look at everything in the short term and tactical level. This is basically the single main reason why both Napoleon and Hitler lost their wars against Russia: an almost exclusive focus on the short term and tactical. In contrast, the Russians are the undisputed masters of operational art (in a purely military sense) and, just like the Chinese, they tend to always keep their eyes on the long-term horizon. Just look at the Turkish downing of a Russian Su-24: everybody bemoaned the lack of “forceful” reaction from Moscow. And then, six months later – what do we have? Exactly.

The modern western culture is centered on various forms of instant gratification, and that is also true for geopolitics. If the other guy does something, western leaders always deliver a “firm” response. They like to “send messages” and they firmly believe that doing something, no matter how symbolic, is better than even the appearance of doing nothing. As for the appearance of doing nothing, it is universally interpreted as a sign of weakness. Russians don’t think that way. They don’t care about instant gratification, they care only about one thing: victory. And if that means to look weak, that is fine. From a Russian perspective, sending “messages” or taking symbolic actions (like all 4 of the recent US attacks in Syria) are not signs of strength, but signs of weakness. Generally, the Russians don’t like to use force which they consider inherently dangerous. But when they do, they never threaten or warn, they take immediate and pragmatic (non-symbolic) action which gets them closer to a specific goal.

It’s rather fascinating how the Russians, rather like George Washington, keep “losing” the direct engagements, but somehow end up in the superior position a month or two later. But that’s why strategy and operations matter more than tactical brilliance.

Those talented immigrants

No doubt it’s just their unique South Asian set of skills that accounts for this suspicious statistical anomaly.

Infosys, the India-based information technology consulting firm with an office in Plano, is facing yet another reverse discrimination lawsuit asserting that it creates a hostile work environment for workers who are not from India or South Asia.

Erin Green, a former supervisor at Infosys, filed suit this week in the Eastern District of Texas in Sherman, alleging that he and black and white staffers on his team were denied raises and promotions, and that other “non-South Asian” workers were berated by South Asian company officials…. In filing suit, Green joined a list of Infosys job applicants and employees who have filed suit in courts in several U.S. jurisdictions arguing reverse discrimination.

“Infosys maintains [more than 20,000] employees working in the United States,” Green’s suit said. While less than 5 percent of the U. S. population is of the South Asian race and national origin, roughly 93 percent to 94 percent of Infosys’s United States workforce “is of the South Asian national origin, (primarily Indian).”

“This disproportionately South Asian and Indian workforce, by race and national origin, is a result of Infosys’s intentional employment discrimination against individuals who are not South Asian, including discrimination in the hiring, promotion, compensation and termination of individuals,” the suit said.

It’s all about identity now. It’s about time whites started playing according to the replacement rules created by the Jews, Italians, and Irish. The days of the old “give it your best shot, Eddie, and may the best man win” have been over since 1965. The USA is no longer an American nation-state, so the only question that matters is “is it good for the whites”.

Or, in this case, Indians.

Realistically, 93 to 94 percent of Infosys’s employees should be repatriated. Because not good for the whites.

EXCERPT: CITY OF CORPSES

An excerpt from John C. Wright’s latest, Moth & Cobweb Book 5.

Wilcolac spoke in a soft voice, but made each word heavy with emphasis. “We have gathered certain scattered fragments of lore from the one place whence elfin lords never sought to remove it. In the Night World, which is their own, they can find and quell all who might know or guess their secret weakness. We of the Twilight World all vow when we come of age unbreakable oaths, intertwined with runes and curses, never to rebel. But among men, aha! In the Daylit World, the King of Shadows would never suspect the humans retain in rituals and rhymes, in old toasts or old place names, the clues of hidden things the men themselves no longer know!”

Gilberec moved restlessly. Matthias yet again raised his hand, but now Wilcolac spoke. “Your friend, my dear young man of the cloth, seems to be bursting to say something you don’t want him to say. Let us hear it.”

Gilberec said, “We come in Arthur’s name. In whose name do you speak?”

Wilcolac said, “There are those among the Cobwebs who are dissatisfied with the sneers and jeers of elfin lords and the sly looks of their ladies. The elfin blood is pure, their lives are long, and their magic is by nature what we half-breeds can only learn by art or by the crafting of bad bargains with dreadful entities. Their overthrow would please us. Do you support their reign?”

Matthias said wearily, “No one is going to give you a straight answer, Gil, not anyone who knows you are a living lie detector. You are wasting time.”

Gilberec said to him, “I would rather know for sure that he will not be straight with us than to suppose he won’t, without giving him a chance.”

Wilcolac raised both eyebrows. “Giving me a chance…? Your cross-examination is allegedly for my benefit…? I am not willing to say who my principals are. They are not sure whom to trust. That is why they come through me: the Cobbler’s Club is a bit like Switzerland. I have to be careful. If I even appeared to take sides, I would be ruined.”

Gilberec said, “There could be a simpler reason why you know how to break an elfish spell than all this talk of scattered books and Eskimo wizards.”

“And what might that reason be?” asked Wilcolac, assuming an innocent stare.

“You are an Anarchist. Do you deny it?”

Wilcolac took a moment to trim his cigar with a silver knife. He lit it with a spark of flame that seemed to come from the thumb of his white kid-leather glove. “A strange accusation. Here in my club, from time to time, I deal with parties on the wrong side of the law. I hear rumors of a Supreme Council of Anarchists. The oath we all swore to the elfs for some reason does not bind them. They use their supernatural powers to ruin all the institutions the elfs have erected among men as reins and chains, as hoods and horseblinkers. The Anarchists are said to have eyes everywhere, fingers in every pie, to control railways, shipyards, banks, communication nodes, and computer networks. They are said to be behind all the dark deeds that prevent the elfs from enjoying in peace their utter victory over men. But I hear rumors saying the opposite, that the Anarchists are mere agitators or died in the Great War. Supposing they were real: why would I serve them? Anarchy is bad for business.”

“That is not a denial,” Gilberec said to Wilcolac. To Matthias he said, “Come on. Let’s go. This is pointless.”

Yumiko had been listening very intently, glad that no one was looking at her.

But just then she shivered and glanced down. The collie dog had finished his caviar snack and laid himself down at the foot of Gilberec’s chair, placing his furry head on the carpet between his paws so that his bright eyes were staring straight at her.

When Gil stood up, the dog growled and coughed and made a slight sniffing noise. Gilberec turned his head, saw her in her scanty, snug costume, but this time, instead of averting his eyes, he looked at her face. A thoughtful frown creased his brow.

Wilcolac said wryly to Matthias, “At this point in the good-cop, bad-cop routine, you, as the boy good-cop, are supposed to restrain your hotheaded friend to sit again, and this will make me eager to show my cards.”

Matthias smiled and scooped up some caviar on a cracker. “I wish we were that organized. The Swan Knight is no hothead. He is slow to anger, but once he is angry, he is slow to forgive. He feels about truth the way I feel about forgiveness. Guilt and fear and hate tie men to their sins with heavy chains and long so that when they die, their tormented spirits remain on earth, haunting the scenes of their crimes. Without forgiveness, how can they be set free to go onward to their reward? So I have no qualms about entering the house of a Necromancer. You have more need of my services than any!”

Wilcolac said sharply, “What does that mean?”

“I saw a Jack-o’-Lantern in an upper window when I entered this house and smelled the spoor of many hounds. You flay the flesh of men for the benefit of wolves and expose the flesh of women for the benefit of men. Do you think I do not know who you are? What you do here?”

Wilcolac squinted at the young novice, and a look of true hatred appeared, if only for a moment, in his eye. “I think an innocent soul like yours cannot imagine the vices I sell, not even in your most sordid nightmares, little boy.”

Matthias smiled, but his eyes were sad. “You forget. Saint Jean Baptiste is only two streets away. Your patrons come to our confessional booth. My master has heard confessed every detail of all the sins you encourage. But they have been washed away, removed entirely from the dreadful scroll no man can read. I am familiar with your works and your ways, and familiar with how to undo them. You are bold indeed to invite me into your house. Unlike my knightly friend, my weapons are spiritual and cannot be bound in their scabbards. No do my weapons know any truce, nor rest.”

Wilcolac’s fingers tightened on his walking stick, but he said nothing.