How’s that diversity thing working out?

Apparently diversity isn’t turning out to be as quite as “good for the Jews” as it’s been advertised. But there is no pressing cause for concern, I’m sure that the third worlders invading America will be much better behaved than the third worlders invading Europe. And speaking as a son of the Mexican Revolution, I can assure you that La Raza Cósmica is every bit as susceptible to appeals to the Holocaust as the Chinese and other immigrant populations are.

Married Holocaust survivors brutally beaten in savage Amsterdam robbery as attackers shouted ‘dirty Jews’ and left them blinded and confined to wheelchairs. Men forced their way into home of Shmuel Blog, 87 and his wife Diana, 86. They beat and kicked the pair and demanded they hand over valuables. Called Mr and Mrs Blog ‘dirty Jews’, tore off their rings and tied them up. Mr Blog was left blinded with a broken thigh and wheelchair-bound for life. Mrs Blog is also confined to a wheelchair suffering from ‘extreme pains’

It seems to me that the Learned Elders of Wye would be well advised to reconsider their previous position on homogenous white Christian populations rather than assume that they can simply relocate to Israel and China after America follows the current European example.

There is no escape from SJW

SJWs are in the process of reinventing James Bond to be more to their liking:

For decades he has swaggered through life conquering women, chain smoking and saving the world, untroubled by the sensitivities of the 21st century. In a new book, however, James Bond will be getting a dose of modern morality, as author Anthony Horowitz reveals the tricks he used to drag the spy kicking and screaming into the era of political correctness.

Horowitz, the writer of new Bond novel Trigger Mortis, said he had worked carefully to preserve Ian Fleming’s original character and ensuring his 1950s attitudes remained in tact.

But he has introduced a cast of new characters to point out the error of his chauvinistic ways, including messages about smoking causing cancer, women who give him a run for his money, and an “outspoken” gay friend.

Horowitz, who has been given access to Fleming’s own notes to research his latest update, said he had inserted “little twists” to make the story work for modern readers.

 “He does smoke cigarettes, he smokes many many cigarettes. But then what I do is I nudge him with a little reference to a newspaper article he happens to glance at which just reminds him that these things will give him cancer. With women, he has this sort of patronising carnal attitude with them which is absolutely accurate to the Bond of the books. But then by creating very strong women he is given quite a run for his money and his attitudes are challenged. I also gave him a very outspoken gay friend, who chides him and says ‘come on Bond, you’re living in the 20th century now not the Middle Ages.’”

It’s not just science fiction, it’s not just games, it’s not just comics, it is literally everywhere. You cannot escape social justice morality, you can only submit to it or fight it. And one way to do the latter, as this gentleman inadvertently demonstrated, is to black-knight it.

Controversy has enveloped the prestigious Best American Poetry anthology after it emerged that a white poet had been included in the selection after adopting a Chinese pen name – and that Yi-Fen Chou’s poem was kept in the much sought-after lineup even after the author told editors his real identity was Michael Derrick Hudson.

At the back of the 2015 edition of The Best American Poetry, which is published today, Yi-Fen Chou is revealed as the pen name of Michael Derrick Hudson, from Indiana. Hudson writes that his poem chosen for the anthology, The Bees, the Flowers, Jesus, Ancient Tigers, Poseidon, Adam and Eve, was rejected under his real name 40 times before he sent it out as Yi-Fen Chou, when it was rejected nine times before getting accepted. “If indeed this is one of the best American poems of 2015, it took quite a bit of effort to get it into print, but I’m nothing if not persistent,” writes Hudson.

At least Mr. Chou has had the sense to avoid apologizing, but it would have been even better if he had simply announced to his critics that he identifies as Chinese and to refer to him as “Michael Hudson” is deadnaming, racist, and wrongskinphobic.

This identity black-knighting is an excellent way to systematically undermine the SJWs, which is to claim whatever identities you find useful and force them to recognize them in precisely the same manner they declare war to be peace, black to be white, and Bruce to be Caitlyn. The key is to not overdo it or be too obvious – I see way too much stupid “well, I’m a lesbian in a man’s body, ha ha ha” here – and to stick to it relentlessly. If you’re a white writer, you should have at least one ethnic nom de plume to your credit.

Rationalist naivete

One of my great disappointments this year has been reading JB Bury’s History of Freedom of Thought. Bury was the editor of my much-beloved Cambridge Medieval History series, which is excellent, and so I was looking forward to reading his thoughts on a matter that is of more than a little interest to me.

But while the book is as erudite and well-sourced as one would expect, it is little more than a one-sided anti-Christian rationalist polemic, with little insight and absolutely no foresight whatsoever. It’s High Church Atheist in a manner that is about as proto-“I Fucking Love Science” as it is possible for a book published in 1913 to be.

One wishes one could bring Bury forward in time to see what passes for reason hath wrought; a thought police more authoritarian, more delusional, and more in conflict with reality than any of the religious opponents of the freedom of thought ever were. Bury’s unjustified faith in the power of reason is a fascinating precursor to the complete inability of the modern irreligious to grasp the connection between Christianity and many of the aspects of Western civilization that they value, as well as their willingness to blithely saw off the branches of the tree on which they are sitting.

The struggle of reason against authority has ended in what appears now to be a decisive and permanent victory for liberty. In the most civilized and progressive countries, freedom of discussion is recognized as a fundamental principle. In fact, we may say it is accepted as a test of enlightenment, and the man in the street is forward in acknowledging that countries like Russia and Spain, where opinion is more or less fettered, must on that account be considered less civilized than their neighbours. All intellectual people who count take it for granted that there is no subject in heaven or earth which ought not to be investigated without any deference or reference to theological assumptions. No man of science has any fear of publishing his researches, whatever consequences they may involve for current beliefs. Criticism of religious doctrines and of political and social institutions is free. Hopeful people may feel confident that the victory is permanent; that intellectual freedom is now assured to mankind as a possession for ever; that the future will see the collapse of those forces which still work against it and its gradual diffusion in the more backward parts of the earth. Yet history may suggest that this prospect is not assured. Can we be certain that there may not come a great set-back? For freedom of discussion and speculation was, as we saw, fully realized in the Greek and Roman world, and then an unforeseen force, in the shape of Christianity, came in and laid chains upon the human mind and suppressed freedom and imposed upon man a weary struggle to recover the freedom which he had lost. Is it not conceivable that something of the same kind may occur again? that some new force, emerging from the unknown, may surprise the world and cause a similar set-back?

The possibility cannot be denied, but there are some considerations which render it improbable (apart from a catastrophe sweeping away European culture). There are certain radical differences between the intellectual situation now and in antiquity. The facts known to the Greeks about the nature of the physical universe were few. Much that was taught was not proved. Compare what they knew and what we know about astronomy and geography—to take the two branches in which (besides mathematics) they made most progress. When there were so few demonstrated facts to work upon, there was the widest room for speculation. Now to suppress a number of rival theories in favour of one is a very different thing from suppressing whole systems of established facts. If one school of astronomers holds that the earth goes round the sun, another that the sun goes round the earth, but neither is able to demonstrate its proposition, it is easy for an authority, which has coercive power, to suppress one of them successfully. But once it is agreed by all astronomers that the earth goes round the sun, it is a hopeless task for any authority to compel men to accept a false view. In short, because she is in possession of a vast mass of ascertained facts about the nature of the universe, reason holds a much stronger position now than at the time when Christian theology led her captive.

All these facts are her fortifications. Again, it is difficult to see what can arrest the continuous progress of knowledge in the future. In ancient times this progress depended on a few; nowadays, many nations take part in the work. A general conviction of the importance of science prevails to-day, which did not prevail in Greece. And the circumstance that the advance of material civilization depends on science is perhaps a practical guarantee that scientific research will not come to an abrupt halt. In fact science is now a social institution, as much as religion.

I wonder if Bury would revise his conclusions in light of the “social construct” school of denial, which has produced everything from the “science” of anthropogenic global warming to multiplying sexes. Considering how ready the SJWs are to deny that a man is, in fact, a man, it is not at all hard to imagine that they would be every bit as willing to compel men to accept a false view of the sun rotating around the earth.

SJWism is the revival of the blasphemy concept, but it is far more dangerous than the religious laws ever were because it lacks a textual anchor. At least with religion, you always knew what blasphemy was and could readily avoid committing it. With the current thought police, they will inform you of your offenses after you have committed them, and neither ignorance of the law nor its previous nonexistence will provide you with any defense.

All you can read

If you have Kindle Unlimited or Amazon Prime, you can now borrow both A THRONE OF BONES and A MAGIC BROKEN at no charge. As it happens, at 854 pages, Amazon will pay more for a Prime or a Kindle Unlimited user reading ATOB than Castalia gets for actually selling a book there. However, this means that neither book is presently available in the Castalia store.

We do NOT plan to do this for most of our books, just to be clear.

Interview with Vox Day

Greg Johnson of Counter-Currents interviewed me last night. The MP3 is available there of our discussion, which he summarized as follows:

Greg Johnson talks to video game designer, musician, blogger, novelist, and publisher Vox Day. Topics include:

  • His political outlook and its formation
  • Why he is no longer a Libertarian
  • “National libertarianism”
  • The necessity of borders
  • The European refugee crisis
  • Why nationalism and tribalism are unstoppable forces
  • Illegitimate forms of identity politics
  • The problem of white identity in the United States as opposed to European national identities
  • His new book SJWs Always Lie
  • Why they always lie
  • Advice to those who wish to roll back political correctness
  • A preview of coming attractions

I think the most interesting part of the interview was when we discussed the problem of “white identity”. I think “whites” are inclined to significantly underperform in identity politics for much the same reason that “Hispanics” and “Asians” do, which is that most people who qualify as white don’t primarily identify as White in the same manner that more cohesive minorities such as Blacks, Jews, Gays, and Women (which actually means Feminists) do.

Ask a “Hispanic” what he is and he’ll tell you he is Mexican or Guatemalan. Ask an “Asian” what he is and he’ll tell you Chinese or Thai. Ask a “white” and he’ll tell you “mostly German” or “half-this, half-that”. You will almost never hear anyone self-identify as White, nor would you have 30 or 40 years ago. And a man who identifies as “Italian-American” is simply not going to see another man who identifies as “Irish” or “Scandinavian” or “German” as his goombah and proactively engage in nepotistic favoritism on his behalf.

There is no nationalism without a cohesive nation and there is no tribalism without identification with the specific tribe.

Rent seekers, not refugees

At this point, a lot of Europeans are beginning to think that Vlad the Impaler’s solution is the correct one to the violent invasion of Western Europe:

I saw an elderly Italian woman in a car that was surrounded by the immigrants. They pulled her by the hair out of the car and wanted to use it to go to Germany. They tried to topple the bus i was in. They threw feces at us, banging on the door for the driver to open it, spat on the glass. My question is- for what purpose? How do they want to assimilate in Germany? For a moment, i felt like in a warzone. I really feel sorry for these people, but if they would reach Poland – I do not think they would receive any understanding from us.

We spent three hours on the border, but failed to get through. The whole group was later transported back to Italy by the police. The bus is butchered, feces smeared, scratched, broken windows. And this is supposed to be an idea for the demographics? These big powerful hordes?

Among them there were almost no women and children – the vast majority was aggressive young men. Just yesterday I read the news on all the websites with real compassion, worried about their fate and today after what I saw I am just afraid. And I am happy they do not choose our country as their destination. We Poles are simply not ready to accept these people – neither culturally nor financially. I do not know if anyone is ready. A giant pathology is approaching the EU, one which we have never seen before. And sorry if anyone is offended by this entry.

A car with humanitarian aid came. Food and water. They just toppled it and stole everything. With megaphones the Austrians announced a message that there is consensus for them to cross over the border – they wanted to register them and let them go on – but they did not understand these messages. None. And it was all the greatest horror … From those few thousand people nobody understood neither Italian nor English, or German, or Russian, or Spanish … What mattered was the law of the fist.

The media coverage is even worse than you think. Do you know why a lot of those “desperate refugees fleeing the Syrian war” are so well-dressed in relatively clean clothes? Because 39 percent of them are from the Balkans. They’re EASTERN EUROPEAN MUSLIMS, they are not from the Middle East or Africa at all, and they aren’t fleeing anything except the societies they’ve already ruined.

About a fifth of asylum seekers to Germany in the first half of the year
were from war-torn Syria, giving them a strong claim to refugee status.
But about 39 per cent were from the western Balkans and primarily
seeking better economic opportunities, giving them little chance of
qualifying for asylum.

And, of course, one wouldn’t want to offend these poor, helpless, grateful people, so the German girls need to start dressing differently, as one school in Bavaria near a “refugee” shelter has already instructed the parents of its students:

“As our school is in the immediate vicinity, it would be appropriate to wear restrained everyday clothes, to avoid conflict. Transparent tops or blouses, short shorts or miniskirts could lead to misunderstandings. In addition, you are asked to refrain from “direct eye contact, ogling, or photographing. Derogatory or racist remarks can not be tolerated in any way.”

This is why the Social Justice ideals of Equality, Diversity, Tolerance, and Progress must be rejected, completely. Because this is exactly where it leads.

Sasquan tries to hide voting scandal?

Unbelievable. I wonder what it is they are trying to hide? Tor buying supporting memberships for its employees?

Back at Sasquan, the BM passed a non-binding resolution to request that Sasquan provide anonymized nomination data from the 2015 Hugo Awards.  I stood before the BM and said, as its official representative, that we would comply with such requests.  However, new information has come in which has caused us to reverse that decision.  Specifically, upon review, the administration team believes it may not be possible to anonymize the nominating data sufficiently to allow for a public release.  We are investigating alternatives.

Thank you for your patience in this matter.  While we truly wish to comply with the resolution and fundamentally believe in transparent processes, we must hold the privacy of our members paramount and I hope that you understand this set of priorities.

Best,

Glenn Glazer
Vice-Chair, Business and Finance
Sasquan, the 73rd World Science Fiction Convention

This is not acceptable. This is not even REMOTELY acceptable. If you voted in the 2015 Hugo Awards, I encourage you to contact Sasquan and demand that they released the anonymized nomination data.

I find it very difficult to believe they are refusing to release it because it might make the Rabid Puppies look bad; we already know that the SJW message that the Puppies voted in lockstep is completely false. So, the question is: what voting patterns tend to embarrass whom?

Let’s look at the usual suspects. Patrick Nielsen Hayden had 65 votes for Best Long Form Editor. John Scalzi had 168 votes for Best Novel and 78 votes for Best Novella. Not exactly suspicious, although I expect there is considerable overlap between Editor and Novella there.

Social justice contradictions

Diversity and Equality are inherently contradictory. The racism of the university diversity champions is just one obvious example.

Her primer on college admissions begins with the basics: application deadlines, the relative virtues of the SAT versus the ACT and how many Advanced Placement tests to take. Then she eases into a potentially incendiary topic — one that many counselors like her have learned they cannot avoid.

“Let’s talk about Asians,” she says.

Lee’s next slide shows three columns of numbers from a Princeton University study that tried to measure how race and ethnicity affect admissions by using SAT scores as a benchmark. It uses the term “bonus” to describe how many extra SAT points an applicant’s race is worth. She points to the first column.

African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points, Lee says.

She points to the second column.

“Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.”

The last column draws gasps.

Asian Americans, Lee says, are penalized by 50 points — in other words, they had to do that much better to win admission.

So blacks are getting a 280-point SAT bonus. Because they’re equal to Asians, who obviously are culturally advantaged in white institutions. Although, what exactly is the benefit to whites to have Asians going to their top universities instead of whites?

Maybe the New Americans will be nice and whites will get their own reservations and casinos too. I have no doubt that there were more than a few of my people back in the day saying, “hey, I’m sure we can get along just fine with these paleskins. There is plenty of land for everyone!”

Fortunately, that could never happen because Asians don’t outnumber Americans like Europeans outnumbered Native Americans… wait a minute!

The Democrats’ defense priority

I don’t know about you, but I doubt the average American will be much reassured by the idea that the “leaders” responsible for national defense are inclined to burst into tears or that the security of another nation appears to be their primary concern:

The head of the Democratic Party, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., choked up while discussing her “gut wrenching” decision to vote in favor of the Iran nuclear deal.

“There’s nothing that’s more important to me, as a Jew, than to ensure Israel’s existence is there throughout our generations,” she said Sunday, choking back tears. Wasserman Schultz announced her vote for the deal, which will ease economic sanctions in return for Iran scaling back its nuclear program, on CNN’s “State of the Union” and in an op-ed for the Miami Herald.

Holding back tears, Wasserman Schultz said that in her op-ed, she talks about her “Jewish heart and how important this [decision] was to me … as a Jewish mother.”

“In weighing everything, all the information, I’ve concluded the best thing to do is vote in support of the Iran deal and put Iran years away from being a nuclear state,” she said. The Obama administration secured enough votes this week to ensure the deal will survive efforts to kill it.

In making her decision, Wasserman Schultz met with President Obama, Vice President Biden, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Secretary of State John Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, as well as dozens of intelligence experts. She has been to the Situation Room twenty times in the past two years, she said, and has personally verified with the Obama administration that Iran will have to allow inspectors in to verify that it is scaling back its nuclear capacity and cannot self-inspect.

Wasserman Schultz said there are “a number of things” in the deal that gave her “angst and pause” and made her decision to vote in favor of it very difficult.

“I worry that the vigilance over the life of deal may wane … that complacency could set in,” she said. “I worry that the additional resources, no matter how little … Iran could divert to terrorist activity that could cause harm to Jews and others around the world. I worry that we have to make sure that the monitoring is really as gap-free as possible.”

Despite her discomfiture with the deal, Wasserman Schultz said she is “confident” that she made the right choice.

“I am confident that the process I have gone through to reach this decision is one that will ensure that Israel will be there forever,” she said.

Being pro-Zionist, I, for one, am pleased to know that Israel’s safety and security is important to American political leaders. I merely regret that America’s safety and security are observably such a trivial matter as far as they are concerned.

 To be fair, Ms Wasserman Schultz did mention in passing that she believes “fervently in protecting America’s national security interests”, they just don’t happen to be as important, or as emotionally moving, to her as ensuring “Israel’s existence is there throughout our generation”.

It would certainly be nice if America’s political leaders cared even one-half as much about America’s borders as they do about Israel’s.

Social Justice Convergence in action

ESPN is “in a panic”:

  • Disney Stock Tanks as Cable Revenue Disappoints – The Street
  • Disney stock hit on ESPN fears – CNN
  • Disney Falls as Revenue Misses, Cable Profit Outlook Darkens – Bloomberg

The table was set for this bad news in May, and internally, ESPN has been in a panic for quite some time. The cord cutting fears have gone from “potential problem” to “very real problem” faster than anyone imagined. When it became clear Keith Olbermann was leaving in early July, we explored the increasing cord cutting phenomenon, and reported how ESPN is under orders from Disney to pull a total of $350 million out of the budget in 2016 and 2017.

Mark St. Cyr explains one likely reason for the “cord cutting” at Zerohedge:

Why wouldn’t ESPN™ (or Disney™ its parent company) go to great efforts to include or push the narrative that “cord cutting” doesn’t necessarily mean “all” that cut have tuned off? In other words: why aren’t numbers from alternative viewing sources highlighted as to show they might not be viewing there – but they are over here? Unless – they aren’t.
And if they’re not – why not? After all, there’s probably no other content infringement policing company for copyright and other applicable ownership rights than Disney and all its subsidiaries. You aren’t going to see it for free or on alternative platforms unless they want or allow for it. Period.

This would also imply if they allowed it (anywhere) it would be accounted for ( i.e., click views, etc.) in some manner of form from across the internet to help take the edge off. i.e., Sure we lost millions from cable, but as you can see here, they’ve just migrated over to this service/platform as an alternative. Monetizing the alternative is a work in progress. etc., etc.

However, that seems not to be the case. The case appears – they’ve not only cut: they’ve tuned out or turned off the programming entirely. Why?

It’s hard to say. However, if I use myself as an example, I believe I know a large part of the underlying reason:

ESPN (like a few notable others such as NBC™) has seemingly transformed at near hyper-speed from sports reporting – to political sports reporting. The political edge now rampant throughout the shows, games, interviews, et al is overbearing, overburdening, and overdone.

From SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police:

The public schools can no longer educate, so people are turning to homeschooling. The universities can no longer provide liberal arts educations, so people are becoming technology-assisted autodidacts. The banks no longer loan, the state and local governments no longer provide basic public services, the military does not defend the borders, the newspapers no longer provide news, the television networks no longer entertain, and the corporations are increasingly unable to provide employment.

Even as the institutions have been invaded and coopted in the interests of social justice, they have been rendered unable to fulfill their primary functions. This is the great internal contradiction that the SJWs will never be able to positively resolve, just as the Soviet communists were never able to resolve the contradiction of socialist calculation that brought down their economy and their empire 69 years after Ludwig von Mises first pointed it out. One might call it the Impossibility of Social Justice Convergence; no man can serve two masters and no institution can effectively serve two different functions. The more an institution converges towards the highest abstract standard of social and distributive justice, the less it is able to perform its primary function.