The consequence of multiculturalism

Roissy points out more scholastic support for the hypothesis that Diversity + Proximity = WAR:

Community psychologists are interested in creating contexts that promote both respect for diversity and sense of community. However, recent theoretical and empirical work has uncovered a community-diversity dialectic wherein the contextual conditions that foster respect for diversity run in opposition to those that foster sense of community. More specifically, within neighborhoods, residential integration provides opportunities for intergroup contact that are necessary to promote respect for diversity but may prevent the formation of dense interpersonal networks that are necessary to promote sense of community.

Using agent-based modeling to simulate neighborhoods and neighborhood social network formation, we explore whether the community-diversity dialectic emerges from two principle of relationship formation: homophily and proximity. The model suggests that when people form relationships with similar and nearby others, the contexts that offer opportunities to develop a respect for diversity are different from the contexts that foster a sense of community. Based on these results, we conclude with a discussion of whether it is possible to create neighborhoods that simultaneously foster respect for diversity and sense of community.

Multiculturalism isn’t merely a failure, it is, like the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty, a leftist program that is delivering precisely the opposite of what it purported to deliver. Instead of racial peace, it has created racial hate. Instead of an end to nationalism, it is delivering intranational ethnic strife.

The Croats don’t fight the Vietnamese, they fight the Serbs. The North Koreans don’t threaten the Ibo, they threaten the South Koreans. And mass inter-ethnic migration has only ensured that the 21st century wars will be even more savage and less limited than those of the 20th century.

No more hate crimes

One hopes that this means an end to the absurd propagandistic concept of “hate crimes” will soon be in sight. The FBI removes both the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center from its web site.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has labeled several Washington, D.C.-based family organizations as “hate groups” for favoring traditional marriage, has been dumped as a “resource” on the FBI’s Hate Crime Web page, a significant rejection of the influential legal group.

The Web page scrubbing, which also included eliminating the Anti-Defamation League, was not announced and came in the last month after 15 family groups pressed Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director James Comey to stop endorsing a group — SPLC — that inspired a recent case of domestic terrorism at the Family Research Council.

“We commend the FBI for removing website links to the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that not only dispenses erroneous data but has been linked to domestic terrorism in federal court. We hope this means the FBI leadership will avoid any kind of partnership with the SPLC,” Tony Perkins, FRC President, told Secrets.

“The Southern Poverty Law Center’s mission to push anti-Christian propaganda is inconsistent with the mission of both the military and the FBI, which is to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States,” he added….

Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, told Secrets, “We are shocked, surprised and disappointed that this would be done without any consultation with groups such as ours who have been working closely with the Federal Bureau of Investigation on issues of hate crime. We look forward to having further conversations with them on this issue.”

It’s like the Holocaust and the Spanish Inquisition all over again! The fact is that these parasitical charlatans have made a literal fortune by preying on white guilt and fears of race hatred while advocating the very multicultural policies that lead directly to widespread ethnic violence.

In a just world, both Foxman and Dees would be prosecuted for their anti-Constitutional, anti-American, and societally destructive actions.

A house blithely divided

It would hard to have provided a better example of John C. Wright’s Unified Field Theory of Madness than we saw in the comments yesterday. And further proving that leftists will say literally anything in order to salve their feelings without concern for their past or future arguments, consider this gem from Snowflake in which he attempts to justify the Left’s primary tactic of disqualification:

the fact that one thing (a round earth) which is true, but for which at one time there was no evidence of, does not mean that anything or everything else for which there is no evidence is also true. Nor can you properly claim anything, be it a round earth, a flat earth, or a pink unicorn to be true, until you provide evidence of it. Disqualification is valid, in that until you provide evidence, the disqualification holds, and you can’t claim that your particular unproven theories are true, simply because there is no other alternate proven theory at the time.

Now, the first statement is partially true, although we know the earth is not actually round, but rather an oblate ellipsoid. It’s rather fitting that an erroneous example should be cited here, but regardless, one can hardly argue with the statement that one cannot assume the correctness of all naked assertions on the basis of one correct naked assertion.

So far so good.

On the other hand, it is absolutely false to assert that one cannot claim anything to be true until evidence for the claim is provided. This exhibits a fundamental confusion between two different concepts, a “claim” and a “proof”. One can claim anything to be true without providing one iota of evidence. Others can freely choose to accept the claim or reject it, but they cannot credibly argue that the claim is intrinsically “disqualified” on the basis of no evidence being provided.

If that were the case, then no one could ever make any statement of fact without simultaneously providing the evidence supporting it. This is an intrinsically anti-scientific perspective, as it would necessarily disqualify all hypotheses, which are claims made in the known absence of evidence. Moreover, it is an inherently self-negating statement, as Snowflake has provided no evidence to support his claim that disqualification of a statement sans evidence is valid.

Moreover, Mr. Wright’s discussion of his theory was not presented as a proof. It was, rather, an explanation of behavior that has been observed on many occasions by many observers in the past. It was a hypothesis, in other words, and one for which considerable evidence was gathered by the feverish attempts to disqualify it.

But why is the Left so eager to disqualify claims and hypotheses? Why does it make a fetish of evidence here while simultaneously denying literal millennia of evidence collected with regards to matters such as human intelligence, genetics, and even the law of supply and demand? (Recall that Wright specifically noted this very behavior in his essay, which none of the critics appear to have actually read before leaping to attack it.) Because the entire aim is to shut down the discussion, silence the perpetrator, and to divert the train of thought before the logical incoherency of the Leftist and the obvious errors of his positions are exposed.

(This is why I crack down so hard on the fools who leap in to engage the trolls on the trolls’ terms. And I use the term “fools” advisedly; one is snapping at the troll’s bait and doing PRECISELY what the troll hopes someone will do by permitting him to shift the matter being discussed away from the one that the troll finds threatening. For example, note how every single discussion of the flaws in TENS is immediately met by multiple attempts to change the subject to Young Earth Creationism. Don’t fall for it.)

The Leftist doesn’t care that his own argument would destroy his own positions; apply this standard to human equality or evolution by natural selection and both fall apart immediately. But because he has no objective standards and no attachment to the truth, the Leftist will blithely apply one subjective standard to his opponents and another to himself without even necessarily realizing it.

The irony is that in attacking Mr. Wright’s Unified Field Theory yesterday, his critics provided the very evidence that they irrelevantly claimed was lacking. If you wish to destroy the credibility of a Leftist’s arguments, you have only to go through it step by step, until you reach the change of definition, ambiguity, logical inconsistency, or outright lie that will INEVITABLY be there. A little patience and precision is all that is required.

The players’ union

I’m not a big fan of unions, but there is no question that college football players have a much better claim to be permitted to unionize than policemen and federal employees.

In a ruling that could revolutionize college athletics, a federal agency ruled Wednesday that college football players at Northwestern University can unionize. The decision by a regional director of the National Labor Relations Board means it agrees football players at the Big Ten school qualify as employees under federal law and therefore can create the nation’s first college athlete’s union….

CAPA attorneys argued that college football is, for all practical
purposes, a commercial enterprise that relies on players’ labor to
generate billions of dollars in profits. That, they contend, makes the
relationship of schools to players one of employers to employees.

It’s hard, if not impossible, to argue with that. The fact that the employer is a university doesn’t mean that the janitors and professors are not employees, and they generate considerably less income than the football players do.

These young men are actually putting their bodies on the line, and they deserve the right to a significant slice of the income their activities are producing.

Madness and the Unreality Principle

John C. Wright presents a brilliant explication of the Left and their relentless denial of observable reality with his Unified Field Theory of Madness:

The Leftist has only two choices here: accept reality, in which case he is no longer a Leftist, or deny reality, in which case his loyalty to the ideals of Leftism becomes rarefied and refined, and he become of their Cathari, the Pure Ones, an arhat of enlightenment.

I spoke above of the Unreality Principle. Here is where it comes into play. The Unreality Principle is the moral imperative to ignore and deny reality at all costs, and remain loyal and faithful to the make-believe illusion-choked funhouse-mirror Wonderland of Liberal Bullshit. You must bathe in the bullshit, eat the bullshit, drink the bullshit, and stuff the bullshit up your nose as far as far can be, because from now own the offal will be feast and wine to you, and will be your baptism and your oxygen. It will feed and sustain you.

However, the Unreality Principle demands a cost. First, there is something like a daily maintenance cost: you must attend closely to whatever the social cues are telling you, and believe them and not your lying eyes….

The Leftists are people who are stupider than average, less moral and
upright and decent than average, who at once combine the worst features
of a self-deceived fool and a self-deceiving conniving con-man. The only
thing that saves them from the constant pain of the dentist drill of
their conscience, the constant clamor of their wretched self-esteem
telling them that they do not deserve to live, the only thing, indeed,
keeping them alive, is their false and inflated sense of sanctimony.
Each one is a Judas, who has betrayed all he hold dear. The only reason
why he does not hang himself from the nearest redbud tree is because he
adopts the numbing hypocrisy of the Pharisee.

There is no greater high than to fly on the drug of smug moral
superiority. You may look down your nose at all fashion of men greater
than you in every other way, but if they are evil and you are righteous,
the savory odor of your righteousness in your own nostrils is finer
than myrrh. It is more than wine which mortals drink; it is nectar of
the gods.

In case you were wondering where our modern-day Chesterton was, well, John C. Wright is it. It is a little frustrating to be publishing his excellent book of essays, the forthcoming TRANSHUMAN AND SUBHUMAN, because not a week goes by that he doesn’t produce another new essay that fairly screams for inclusion in it.

Needless to say, there will be a sequel if Mr. Wright is so inclined.

And if you haven’t read his GOLDEN AGE trilogy yet, you simply must. It is more than excellent, it is inspiring. Consider this quote from THE GOLDEN TRANSCENDANCE, which I am currently reading:

“[E]very intelligent entity, human or machine, requires justification to undertake the strenuous effort of continued existence. For entities whose acts conform to the dictates of morality, this process is automatic, and their lives are joyous. Entities whose acts do not conform to moral law must adopt some degree of mental dishonesty to erect barriers to their own understanding, creating rationalization to elude self-condemnation and misery. The strategy of rationalization adopted by a dishonest mind falls into predictable patterns.”

Note that this isn’t exposition or preaching, but a concept that is seamlessly integrated into the plot in order to explain the potential of mere human minds to correctly anticipate the thinking of superhuman, supersmart machine intelligences.

Ebony and ivory

Dwelling together in what would appear to be less than entirely perfect harmony:

The other night we reported how a mob of 200 teens went on a rampage in downtown Louisville, Kentucky last Saturday night, assaulting people and mob-robbing stores. There was surveillance footage from a store that was mob-robbed that showed the teens to be black – a detail left out in the reporting of the story.

One of the women attacked was reported to be in her car with her children in the backseat. She has come forward to explain what really happened and it’s a situation none of us would want to find ourselves in, especially with 5 children in the car:

    WDRB – It was around 8 p.m. Saturday when Viola Loeffler says she and her family were attacked at the intersection at First and Liberty.

    “Right before we got to the stoplight, we noticed about 50 to 100 teens coming to the middle of the street. It was a one-way street so we couldn’t go any further. All of a sudden, one of them throws a garbage can on our car,” said Loeffler.

    Loeffler says after that, the situation quickly escalated.

    Her boyfriend, Ron Carter, was in the driver’s seat and stopped the car to see what was going on. They say when he got out, the teens moved in on him.

    “All of a sudden, I’m getting attacked,” Carter told WDRB.

    Meanwhile, Loeffler and her five children were still inside the car.

    “At that point , I jump in the driver’s seat. I hear them throwing rocks at my car. The rocks were hitting the kids inside of the car,” said Loeffler.

It would appear that it is not only European-Americans who are becoming increasingly disinclined to suffer the joys of vibrancy, as seen in this predominantly African community:

Detroit homeowners have had enough. Police are too slow, and criminals are relentless. Since Feb. 22, homeowners have fatally shot six would-be intruders. The latest came at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday when a man shot and killed two men who were tying to break into his home on the 14800 block of Dexter, police said. So far this year, Detroit has recorded at least 10 justifiable homicides, compared to 15 in all of 2013.

The law is clear, as is the police disinclination to endanger themselves or attract criticism by getting involved. This presents the non-vibrant individual with three options. One is to take the Derbyshire approach and simply avoid public gatherings of Vibrant Americans. The second is the Detroit approach. Mind your own business, be prepared, and shoot to kill without hesitation if attacked in any way. And the third is the SWPL approach. Pretend that it is 1950 and that everyone is the same except for their skin color, then express complete shock and dismay when you or your children are attacked by rampaging vibrants.

UPDATE Fox has a clip of the Vibrant TV in Louisville.

The Sad Puppy Hugo Slate

Larry Correia recommends the following slate to the registered Hugo voters:

Best Novel

Warbound, the Grimnoir Chronicles – Larry Correia – Baen

A Few Good Men – Sarah Hoyt – Baen

Novella

“The Butcher of Khardov” – Dan Wells – Skull Island Expeditions

“The Chaplain’s Legacy” – Brad Torgersen – Analog

Novellete

“The Exchange Officers” – Brad Torgersen – Analog

“Opera Vita Aeterna” – Vox Day – The Last Witchking

Best Fanzine

Elitist Book Reviews – Steve Diamond

Best Editor Long Form

Toni Weisskopf

Best Editor Short Form

Bryan Thomas Schmidt

Campbell Award

Marko Kloos

Frank Chadwick

It should be interesting to see how this all turns out. But after John Scalzi – how entirely unsurprising – laid the groundwork for the open politicization of the Hugo Award, it was inevitable that what had always been done quietly behind closed doors would come out in the open.

In addition to the Sad Puppy slate I am adding the following works:

Best Short Story
Port Call – Michael Z. Williamson – Baen
The Krumhorn and Misericorde – Dave Freer – Baen
Dog’s Body – Sarah A. Hoyt – Baen
Failsafe – Karen Bovenmyer – Iron Dragon Books

Best Related Work
Writing Down the Dragon – Tom Simon – Bondwine Books
On Training for War – Tom Kratman – Baen
A Terrible Thing to Lose:Zombie Science and Science Fiction in John Ringo’s
Under a Graveyard Sky – Tedd Roberts – Baen

Best Professional Artist
Kirk DouPonce

That’s not the only option

Developing political policy for a white minority populace:

For the first time in American history, non-whites will make up half or more of the next generation, likely pushing Washington toward a bigger government — and the GOP better tone down their anti-government rhetoric if they want to win them, according to a top polling outfit.

At a briefing for congressional aides hosted by the moderate Republican Ripon Society, Pew Research Vice President Michael Dimock said that the trend among younger Americans is support for government programs and acceptance of Democratic Party policies.

“Their tendency is more liberal, their tendency is bigger government,” he said of so-called “millennials” born between 1979 and 1995. They will likely set the trend for the still-unnamed next generation.

“This is a generation that is 41 percent non-white; the generation behind it is likely to be close to 50 if not more than 50 percent non-white, and the anti-government kind of tone is one that really doesn’t resonate with that non-white sector in particular,” said Dimock at the Ripon retreat.
Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

His advice to the GOP: “Try to take as much of the anti-government rhetoric out.”

There is, of course, another obvious option. Try to remove the non-white population from the electorate. Given that it has already been observed how whites are beginning to abandon the Democratic Party, and given what we know about the way in which historical multi-ethnic societies have usually ended, Occam’s Razor tends to point towards wide-scale disenfranschisement, if not ethnic cleansing, throughout the West.

After all, the EU has already disenfranchised entire nations. A few population sub-groups would be a moderate policy by comparison.

If you find these prospects to be impossible, ask yourself this question: Is the prospect of ethnic cleansing in the USA more or less unthinkable than state-imposed homosexual “marriage” was a mere two decades ago?

Pro-vaccine dishonesty

If you are an advocate of mass vaccination who wonders why more and more people simply don’t trust those who are pushing vaccines on everyone, these two quotes from a vaccine debate on Reason should suffice to illustrate why:

PRO: A 2007 article in the Journal of the American Medical
Association compared the annual average number of cases and
resulting deaths of various diseases before the advent of vaccines
to those occurring in 2006. Before an effective diphtheria vaccine
was developed in the 1930s, for example, the disease infected about
21,000 people in the United States each year, killing 1,800. By
2006 both numbers were zero. Polio, too, went from deadly (16,000
cases, 1,900 deaths) to non-existent after vaccines were rolled out
in the 1950s and 1960s. Chickenpox used to infect 4 million kids a
year, hospitalize 11,000, and kill 105; within a decade of a
vaccine being rolled out in the mid-1990s, infections had dropped
to 600,000, resulting in 1,276 hospitalizations and 19 deaths.
Similar dramatic results can be found with whooping cough, measles,
rubella, and more.

CON: Judging from what one reads and hears in the popular media, it is easy to conclude that the science is settled, that the benefits of each vaccine clearly outweigh the risks, and that vaccinations have played the critical role in the decline of deaths due to infectious diseases such as measles, whooping cough, and diphtheria, all of which claimed many lives in the past.

However even a cursory look at the available data quickly reveals that the mortality from almost all infectious disease was in steep decline well before the introduction of vaccination or antibiotics. Diphtheria mortality had fallen 60 percent by the time vaccination was introduced in the 1920s, deaths from pertussis/whooping cough had declined by 98 percent before vaccination was introduced in the late 1940s, measles mortality had dropped 98 percent from its peak in the U.S. by the time measles inoculation was introduced in 1963-and by an impressive 99.96 percent in England when measles vaccination was introduced in 1968. In 1960 there were 380 deaths from measles among a U.S. population of 180,671,000, a rate of 0.24 deaths per 100,000.

The takeaway here is that vaccination played a very minor role in the steep decline in mortality due to infectious disease during the late 19th century and early to mid- 20th century. Improved living standards, better nutrition, sanitary sewage disposal, clean water, and less crowded living conditions all played crucial roles.

Again and again and again, we see the pro-vaccine side playing very fast and loose with the truth. They intentionally try to claim statistical benefits for mass vaccination that cannot possibly be attributed to it, even as the pharmaceutical companies disavow any responsibility for the products that they are lobbying to have legally imposed upon children who cannot possibly consent to having foreign substances injected into their bodies.

The vaccine lobby is a corrupt big government abomination that would vaccinate for oxygen if it could get away with it and no one who describes himself as a libertarian or even a conservative should support it in any way, shape, or form, regardless of his belief in the efficacy of vaccination. There is absolutely no libertarian case for mandatory vaccination and anyone who claims there is identifies himself as an ideological fraud.

May I suggest crying Holocaust?

Failing that, I’m sure this weakening support is nothing that a few judicious accusations of anti-semitism wouldn’t cure:

Support for Israel is weakening among evangelical Christians, prompting a new struggle for the hearts and minds of younger members of America’s largest pro-Israel demographic group. While hard numbers are not available, evangelical leaders on both sides of the divide on Israel agree that members of the millennial generation do not share their parents’ passion for the Jewish state; many are seeking some form of evenhandedness when approaching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“What is happening is that the hard line of Christian Zionists was not successfully passed forward to the next generation, because it was based on theological themes that are now being questioned by younger evangelicals,” said David Gushee, professor of Christian ethics and director of the Center for Theology and Public Life at Mercer University in Atlanta.

I find it rather amusing that after decades of relentless Jewish attacks on evangelical Christianity, Jews are suddenly alarmed to discover that evangelical Christians are no longer reliably in their corner. How is this a surprise to anyone? They should be relieved that they haven’t managed to convert evangelicals into open enemies despite their best efforts.

If Ha’aretz is worried now, perhaps they should have a look at Europe, where the post-Christians are openly anti-Israel. After coming to America, many Jewish immigrants foolishly elected to attack the primary factor that prompted America to give them refuge. Ah well, no worries, there is always China. Are we not reliably informed of the tremendous respect and affection the Han have for the Jewish people?

Upon reading the end of the article, it appears it is impossible to parody at least one of these organizations:

The group is also launching speaking tours on campuses, and intends to invest in videos and social media activity that will monitor Christian influencers and “confront them when they cross the line.”

Now that’s going to work a treat. Nothing inspires love and affection like monitoring and confronting people.