The only serious candidate

Donald Trump is not only a serious candidate for President of the United States of American, he is the ONLY serious candidate for the office:

The billionaire politician fired his stiffest broadsides in Texas – the ultimate American border state – at illegal immigrants, the ‘sanctuary cities’ that give them safe haven from deportation, and the pundits who have castigated him for declaring war on them all.

‘We are a dumping ground for the rest of the world,’ he complained. ‘You people are suffering,’ Trump said. ‘I’m in New York, but they’re in New York, too. They’re all over the place. It’s disgusting what’s happening to our country!’

Gang members who are in the U.S. illegally, he pledged, ‘will be out of here so frickin fast’ if he takes over the Oval Office.

And he returned to the brash rhetoric that made him a household name among immigration watchers, referring to child-citizens born of illegal immigrants as ‘anchor babies’ before allowing that ‘I don’t mean to be disrespectful.’

Trump said that just before emerging from the corner of the American Airlines center, where the Dallas Stars hockey team and Dallas Mavericks basketball team play, he had met with Texans who had lost family members to a crime wave brought north by illegal border-crossers.

‘Their sons, their daughters – killed by illegal immigrants!’ Trump boomed. ‘We have to stop illegal immigration!’

Chants of ‘USA! USA! USA!’ rang out even as a small group of immigrants’ rights protesters demonstrated outside.

‘We have to build a wall, folks,’ he said to a crescendo of cheers. ‘We have to build a wall. And a wall works. All you have to do is go to Israel and say “How does your wall work?”‘

He’s definitely listening to the Alt-Right and not the so-called “conservative media”. No wonder they hate him so much. If you’re even remotely concerned about immigration and its societally destructive effects, Trump is the only candidate you can possibly support.

One thing I think those who assume he is bluffing are missing: politicians are affected much more strongly by their wives than most people think. And look what is happening in Melania Trump’s homeland. I’m as cynical about politics as anyone, but I don’t see Trump doing a double-cross on immigration were he to win.

The people have spoken

That will be enough, Porky. A sufficient number of readers have now expressed the same sentiment concerning your comments that I have decided your continued participation in the discourse is not beneficial, therefore your comments will no longer be permitted.

Rest assured that should we feel the need to be blessed with your wisdom in the future, we will not hesitate to seek your no doubt very valuable counsel.

The blessings of diversity

I’m sure this Danish family is absolutely delighted that they didn’t raise their daughter to be racist or Islamophobic:

Lisa Borch had befriended some Arab men in a nearby asylum center. In a particularly radical Muslim she finally fell in love, she worked more and more with Islam and wanted to at times even go to Syria.

Then it turned out that the man she loved so much, was married and had a wife and children in Sweden. He left them and went back to Sweden. Solace she found in Bakhtiar Mohammed Abdulla from Iraq. The two became close friends, but still held firmly in court because they were just pals.

The mother wanted that Lisa separates from its Arab friends and re-live the normal life of a normal teenager. Lisa began to forge plans for murder and even showed one day her twin sister a knife. The only shook his head in horror. Then Tine Romans was stabbed.

In court, Lisa accuse her boyfriend Bakhtiar. He accused her, claiming she had only called him when his mother was already dead. He had only been in the house to help Lisa. Both modified several times their statements, even in court.

The fact is that he was no longer there when the police arrived. However, they found his fingerprints in the bedroom of the mother.

Staatsanwältig Karina Skou said during their speeches: “This murder was cold-blooded, cold and carried out in a bestial way.”

On Thursday, the verdict was: both are guilty of having carried out jointly the murder. Who led the knife ultimately, however, could not be clarified. Lisa Borch got nine years imprisonment, the first year in a closed youth institution, then she goes to jail.

She was a very pretty little blonde. Throw in a little multiculturalism and some mudsharking, and she was quite literally willing to murder her own mother. The wages of diversity are quite literally death.

Facebook moves into speech policing

I don’t even use it, but I’m shutting down my Facebook account. This is why:

Facebook pledged Monday to combat racist hate speech on its German-language network amid an upsurge in xenophobic comments online as Germany faces an unprecedented influx of refugees.

The US social media network said it would encourage “counter speech” and step up monitoring of anti-foreigner commentary, as company representatives were due to meet German Justice Minister Heiko Maas later Monday.

Facebook said it would work with other organisations in Germany “to develop appropriate solutions to counter xenophobia and racism and to represent this online”.

It also urged users to report offensive postings and announced a partnership with the group Voluntary Self-Monitoring of Multimedia Service Providers (FSM).

As Germany faces a record influx of refugees and a backlash from the far right, social media such as Facebook have seen an upsurge of hateful, xenophobic commentary.

Big Brother being corporate rather than government doesn’t make it any better. This is Orwellian in the extreme.

It’s already on the way

As Glenn Reynolds notes, “this column about  “THE NEXT GENOCIDE,” kind of misses the point:”

BEFORE he fired the shot, the Einsatzgruppe commander lifted the Jewish
child in the air and said, “You must die so that we can live.” As the
killing proceeded, other Germans rationalized the murder of Jewish
children in the same way: them or us….

When mass killing is on the way, it won’t announce itself in the language we are familiar with. The Nazi scenario of 1941 will not reappear in precisely the same form, but several of its causal elements have already begun to assemble.

It is not difficult to imagine ethnic mass murder in Africa, which has already happened; or the triumph of a violent totalitarian strain of Islamism in the parched Middle East; or a Chinese play for resources in Africa or Russia or Eastern Europe that involves removing the people already living there; or a growing global ecological panic if America abandons climate science or the European Union falls apart.

Today we confront the same crucial choice between science and ideology that Germans once faced. Will we accept empirical evidence and support new energy technologies, or allow a wave of ecological panic to spread across the world?

Denying science imperils the future by summoning the ghosts of the past.

Or, you know, the invasion of Europe by millions of Muslims. Or the invasion of the USA by tens of millions of third-worlders. Either of them strike me as considerably more likely candidates than a Chinese play for resources in Eastern Europe.

However, until this summer, I would have said that the Chinese play for Africa was the most likely one. The Europeans will probably be content to simply engage in a second Reconquista and the Chinese make the KKK look like the Anti-Defamation League. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if the Chinese resorted to genetic warfare in Africa; I very much doubt the African invasion of Europe is leading them to believe that coexistence in a Chinese-colonized Africa is possible, let alone desirable.

Nationalism isn’t an evil. Nationalism and homogenous populations is what protects societies from horrors most people can’t even imagine.

Raping the children Americans won’t rape

Deport them all. Now.

An attempted child abduction at Beech Bend Park  Saturday in Bowling Green, Kentucky leads to two arrests. Police found 26-year-old Agustin Mendez-Intzin detained by park goers when they arrived to the call Saturday afternoon that a man was attempting to carry a six-year-old female juvenile out of the park.

It was revealed during the investigation that Mendez-Intzin was involved in a physical relationship with the 12-year-old female cousin of the 6 year old whom he met a few weeks prior at the park. In the company of Mendez-Intzin at the time was 25-year-old Juan Cipriano-Mora.

If the choice is between having your children raped and killed or murderous ultra-nationalists, the normal citizenry will choose the ultras every single time. The loudest voices in favor of immigration bans and mass deportations should be the strident anti-Nazis, because the mass migrations presently being enabled by the Western governments is the most certain way to bring the ultras to power.

But, as we know, some people cannot be instructed by mere information.

Doxxing and outing is bad

Unless the SJW-infested media does it to an anti-SJW. Then it’s news.

 ‘Julia Caesar’, an anonymous right-wing blogger who has blasted Swedish journalists for writing an “epoch of lies” about the benefits of immigration, is herself a former reporter for Sweden’s biggest broadsheet, Dagens Nyheter, according to a Swedish tabloid.

The controversial writer, who has sought to keep her identity secret, has been causing a huge stir on social media since 2010. Her blog posts lay into mainstream politicians and what she describes as “the corrupt media” for promoting what she argues is an “epoch of lies” about immigration. They also praise the rise of the nationalist Sweden Democrat Party.

“It simply isn’t possible to lie about the blessings of multiculturalism or mass immigration forever when citizens clearly see with their own eyes how their country is being dismantled in front of them,” reads one of her recent posts, which has also been translated into English on a separate blog by one of her supporters.

On Wednesday, Sweden’s Expressen tabloid revealed that the blogger – who has also published three books – is herself a former journalist for Dagens Nyheter (DN), a Swedish newspaper.

The reason SJWs are always so desperate to out and doxx people is because they want to be able to exert social pressure on them, discredit them, and disemploy them. This is why the protection of anonymity is vital, and why it is always a wise idea to establish more than one online identity if you are going to stand up against SJWs in any context.

And this is also why it is very important to offer public support to those the SJWs have successfully identified and targeted. Not everyone is psychologically suited to deal with direct targeting, but as for me, I laugh every time I see my given name “revealed” again in a blog post or news article.

I always wonder how the writer justifies it in his head. Does he ever refer to Bono as Paul Hewson? Or 50 Cent as Curtis Jackson? Or Brianna Wu as John Flynt? It’s useful, though, as whenever I see my given name appear, I know the writer is an SJW who is hoping to increase the social pressure on me, as if just a little more will finally do the trick.

There Will Be More

Dr. Jerry Pournelle has an important announcement:

Accepting submissions for a new volume of the There Will Be War series. Send with cover note to submission@therewillbewar.net. Stories should preferably be 20,000 words or less.  Poetry encouraged, but see the previous series; it needs to make sense. Hard science fiction mainly; urban fantasy with a military theme possibly acceptable, but mostly we want hard, realistic stories.  They need not be action adventure; good command decision stories encouraged. Space opera always considered.  Again see the previous nine volumes.

Nonexclusive anthology rights only are purchased.  Payment on acceptance is $100 advance against pro rata share of 50% of the revenues received from the publisher. Given the sales of the previous volumes we expect this to be a respectable payment. Original works will be considered, but author is welcome to sell it elsewhere; we purchase only nonexclusive anthology rights.

There will be a hardbound print edition, paperback if the sales indicate it, and eBook publication. Contributors will receive an author’s copy. Each contribution will have an introduction by the editor. The work will contain non-fiction essays by invited contributors: again see the previous volumes. 

There Will Be War has historically been a reprint anthology, so reprints are not only fine, they are preferred. But if you’re a military science fiction writer, be sure to only send in your very best, as this will essentially be a “best of” the last two decades of military science fiction. If Vol. X can somehow reach what I consider to be the heights of Vol. II, I will be extremely pleased.

And if you haven’t read There Will Be War Vol. II yet, go and get it now. Just do it. The entire series is more than merely good, it is important. But in my opinion, Volume II is the best SF anthology ever published. Seriously, it was hard to decide which of the stories most merited mention in the Amazon listing. Of particular note are “Superiority” by Arthur C. Clarke, “In the Name
of the Father” by Edward P. Hughes, “‘Caster” by Eric Vinicoff,
“Cincinnatus” by Joel Rosenberg, “On the Shadow of a Phosphor Screen” by
William Wu, and “Proud Legions”, an essay on the Korean War by T.R.
Fehrenbach.

I was talking to Dr. Pournelle recently, and one of the things I told him was that I was extremely surprised to learn, upon editing the re-released anthologies, how much influence There Will Be War had upon my intellectual development. If you have a teenage boy, this is a series that should be a part of his education.

The NFL opener

This is your weekly open NFL thread. I’m disappointed the Vikes aren’t playing until tomorrow night, but it will be good to see some football again anyhow, Roger Goodell notwithstanding.

Less politics, more football. How hard is that?

And if you don’t like football, that’s nice. No one asked for your opinion. Go talk about how much you don’t like it somewhere else. We don’t care.

Mailvox: Rhetoric in action

The lightbulb goes on for IndecisiveEvidence:

My first instinct reading that exchange is to shake my head. It’s just you and Kluwe doing catty girl sniping. I’m a troll so I get it but it seems stupid. Then it hit me. You reminded me in the comment thread here. I read your book. You’re exercising the language Sparklepunter speaks. Brilliant. It’s still stupid but now in a completely different light that makes perfect sense.

Rhetoric often strikes those outside its emotional impact range as stupid. Think about the nasty little comment about her new dress that absolutely crushes the teen girl; the same comment made to anyone else might not only seem stupid, but insane. However, as I seem to keep having to point out to those who are quite stupidly attached to the idea that flawless logic and reason are genuinely capable of persuading 100 percent of all human beings of anything, rhetoric is devoid of information content. It is not intended to instruct or inform. It is intended to emotionally influence.

In the case of adversarial rhetoric, the objective is to cause sufficient emotional pain to the other party to force them to withdraw from the conflict. Now, withdrawal does not necessarily mean that any emotional pain has been caused, but one can usually tell if this is the case or not on the basis of any abrupt alteration of one party’s behavior. Usually, this will be the attacking party suddenly breaking off contact. To utilize the catty girl sniping analogy, whoever bursts into tears and runs away loses status, whoever remains there gains it.

Kluwe’s rhetoric was unfocused, shallow, and ineffective. He tried to associate me with Nazis, which is neither new to me nor true, and has no more effect on me than the previous five thousand attempts. Recognizing that, he then tried to pick at what he thought would be a sore spot, but I hadn’t spent any time thinking about how to respond to him and having three Hugo No Awards doesn’t bother me in the slightest. After all, I knowingly sought two of them this year. So he moved on to the assertion that my movement, whatever that may be, is failing and that my supporters are rats attempting to disassociate from me.

Considering that the VFM have grown from 434 strong to 445 in the last few days, the new book is still #1 in Political Philosophy, and the site traffic is on course to set a new monthly record, this was the precise opposite of effective rhetoric, which always has some basis in truth. How terrible do you feel, having been labeled a disloyal rodent by Sparklepunter?

Contrast with that my own rhetoric, which associated Kluwe, the father of two young girls, with pedophilia. This had a strong basis in truth, since Kluwe was actively defending a known pedophile in his unprovoked challenge to GamerGate. It was focused, as I continued to harp on that theme, and it was effective, as Kluwe rapidly went from attacking GamerGate and publicly asserting his support for Nyberg to retreating and hitting the mute button in the course of just a few tweets.

It was somewhat of a pity, because I had some even sharper rhetoric prepared, but it should illustrate that contra the mindless catty girl sniping some erroneously thought it to be, it was effective rhetoric that demoralized an enemy and defeated his rhetorical attack. No one came away from reading that thinking about National Socialism. A dialectical response that cited Nyberg’s various deeds would have been totally ineffective since Kluwe was already familiar with all of the relevant information and had chosen to ignore it.

“Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest
knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For
argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people
whom one cannot instruct.”
– Aristotle, Rhetoric 

I repeat: Meet dialectic with dialectic. Meet rhetoric with rhetoric. Meet pseudo-dialectic with dialectic to expose the rhetoric, then follow it up with rhetoric. Those who tend to favor dialectic very much need to understand that the emotional impact of dialectic in response to rhetoric is every bit as ineffective as the logical impact of rhetoric is in response to dialectic.

It may help to keep in mind that whenever you try to use information to persuade a rhetoric speaker, you sound like “the train is fine” guy. You may be correct, but you’re totally missing the point.