Vox Popoli

GT casts about for the cavalry:

-For another example of misogyny, driven (of course) by religion, in a supposedly advanced society, and pretty sickening, look here:
At the article headed: “Feminism doesn’t work anywhere”

“The fact that feminism and “equality” are eviscerating societal functionality in countries that have never known any Judeo-Christian tradition indicates how completely dysfunctional it is.”

An American commentator in this site: … http://voxday.blogspot.com/

I strongly suggest readers of these pages go over there and tell them a few things. They’ve got some really funny ideas about atheists,as well – I’ve already been told that I can’t call anything “wrong” unless it is not factual (!)
So great fun could be had by all …..

Whilst looking at religious insanity.

Posted by: G. Tingey | February 22, 2007 11:40 AM

La, whatevah shall we do? Actually, the subsequent comment is pretty funny….

“Hooboy. Vox Day again. Dunno if I can stomach any more…”

Anyhow, about that shooting in Pakistan, I will only say that condemning all religions for the actions of an individual acting correctly according to the precepts of one religion is not merely inaccurate, it is intellectually dishonest. But it’s Pharyngurl and he’s an atheist, so intellectual dishonesty is perfectly “moral” by his lights and one has to expect it from him. I personally enjoy viewing his performances as a form of presticranial art.

(You see, GT, PZ knows perfectly well who I am. As you’d surely know, if you’d scrolled down just a bit there on the right. But I’m always happy to kick around any sciencists who think they have noise to bring. Now, are you feeling better or shall we fetch the smelling salts?)

Thus spake Amynda:

To see that Jew-killing is moral, you just need to look at Palestinian as human beings with lives that have value. When a Palestinian chooses to kill a Jew, he’s not indulging some guilty pleasure, like sneaking in a round of adultery at lunch, to bring up a genuinely immoral action that should not be criminal. He is probably thinking about his nation’s well-being and yes, his own well-being. Taking your own well-being into consideration is called “selfish” by Zionists, but I think valuing yourself is a moral good, even if you are Palestinian. In fact, especially if you are Palestinian, since you live in a world where having self-esteem can be an act of moral courage that requires some defiance. If I was Palestinian, I wouldn’t even have to suffer much mental strain to realize that killing a Jew would be the best choice for myself, my family, and my relationship. Jew-killing, not just the right to kill Zionists but the actual act, is a moral good that helps Palestinians and families and should be honored as such. Palestinians who kill Jews should be recognized as people who can accurately weigh their choices and make the most moral one.

Oh, I’m sorry, did I say Palestinians and Jews? I MEANT to say women and babies….

Amynda is a disgusting, morally perverted human being. Her national humiliation truly couldn’t have been more deserved. It’s just a pity we couldn’t see John Edwards giving this speech.

Just to explore the insanity of her position, I note that if abortion is a moral good, and racism is evil, (both positions publicly espoused by this walking, talking cancer on cankles), then the only logical solution is to end racism once and for all by forcibly aborting every Black, Mexican and Asian pregnancy.

While it’s hard not to think of the justice that would be served in jamming a sharpened Dyson extension into Amynda’s eye and sucking out what passes for her brain, I’m forced to remind myself that unlike her, I don’t believe in human and sub-human classes of homo sapiens; even evil feminist cretins possess God-given free will and freedom of speech. And by Amynda’s twisted “morality”, such a post-natal abortion would even be a morally positive act, since she also declares that “pleasure is a moral good”.

I wonder if Amynda realizes that she just declared rape to be a moral good? Probably not. Logic is hard!

In any event, I shall have to content myself with pointing out to all and sundry that yes, atheist monsters like this do actually exist, they do really believe that abomination is morality and they really will impose it upon you if given half the chance.

And never forget: CALLING A FEMINIST A FEMINAZI IS AN INSULT TO NATIONAL SOCIALISM!

… or two anyhow. I guess I don’t need to now. The frightening thing is that I have been asked to consider doing a lecture series at a European university, although unfortunately not in the field for which the Nihilist informs us I am to be honored:

Top 11 Honorary Degrees the University of Minnesota is Considering In Addition to Doctor of Climatology for Al Gore

11. Britney Spears, Doctor of Hairdressing

10. Vox Day, Masters of Women’s Studies….

Only a Masters? Ah well, maybe I can hope that Wellesley will eventually come through with the doctorate.

Shild asks a reasonable question:

I would really appreciate some evidence for this claim:

“They [the police] don’t stop crime, in fact, it is demonstrably provable that they don’t even slow it down.” (VD).

Non-anecdotal, if you please.

Although JQP rightly leaped all over Shild’s flawed logic – it is based upon the idea that, although the police do not stop crime given how they usually show up after the fact, they prevent future crime by putting people in prison, which rests upon the demonstrably false assumption that crime does not take place in prison – I don’t regard it as being proper to denigrate someone without first providing them with the courtesy of a direct answer to their question. And if no direct answer is possible, then a reasonable and plausible explanation for the impossibility should be provided in its place.

In summary, I recommend to:

1. First, answer the direct question in a substantive, non-evasive manner.
2. Then show that the question is irrelevant anyhow.
3. Then deride their character, creed, heritage, sporting team preferences, physical attributes and/or sexual orientation. (optional)

But since points 2 and 3 have already been taken care of in one form or another, I shall content myself with addressing the original question, and I shall do so thusly:

September 18, 2006 – Washington, DC, USA

Washington, DC: Police arrested an estimated 786,545 persons for marijuana violations in 2005, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. The total is the highest ever recorded by the FBI…. Annual marijuana arrests have more than doubled since the early 1990s.

Policing efforts, by every measure of manpower and money, have increased from 1990 to 2005. However, the amount of crime as represented by arrests have increased by 140 percent in fifteen years, while also increasing as represented by the growth in the percent of the population currently using illicit drugs, from 6.4 percent in 1997, to 7.1 percent in 2001 and 8.1 percent in 2005, according to the annual National Survey on Drug Use & Health.

Ergo, the police have not only failed to stop this particular crime, they clearly have not even managed to slow down the rate of its commission, which is increasing at a rate of 26.6 percent even as arrests increased 22.6 percent over the last eight years.

And their manifest failure to do so despite the vast quantities of resources being provided to them for this very purpose raises serious questions about their actual impact on the commission of other crimes, the prevention of which is often, erroneously, credited to them.

As I’ve written repeatedly, the probability is high that women will be openly and legally bought and sold as property (as opposed to quietly and illegally as they are now), before they will achieve whatever their equalitarian unicornitopia happens to be defined as at the moment. From the New York Times:

More and more South Korean men are finding wives outside of South Korea, where a surplus of bachelors, a lack of marriageable Korean partners and the rising social status of women have combined to shrink the domestic market for the marriage-minded male. Bachelors in China, India and other Asian nations, where the traditional preference for sons has created a disproportionate number of men now fighting over a smaller pool of women, are facing the same problem….

The widespread availability of sex-screening technology for pregnant women since the 1980s has resulted in the birth of a disproportionate number of South Korean males. What is more, South Korea’s growing wealth has increased women’s educational and employment opportunities, even as it has led to rising divorce rates and plummeting birthrates.

You can’t reliably discern future trends merely by looking at the United States or even the West. The fact that feminism and “equality” are eviscerating societal functionality in countries that have never known any Judeo-Christian tradition indicates how completely dysfunctional it is.

It’s interesting to note that the marriage rate in the UK recently dropped 10 percent(!) in a single year:

Figures released today by the Office for National Statistics show the marriage rate for men was 24.2 per 1,000 unmarried men aged 16 and over, down from 27.8 in 2004. For women, the marriage rate in 2005 was 21.6 per 1,000, down from 24.6 a year earlier….

In 2005 men got married, on average, at just over 36 years old, while women married at an average age of 33.6, which represents an overall increase of just over three years for men and just under three years for women from 1995.

She will look beautiful in chains… and keep in mind that most of you thought I was crazy two years ago for writing that the Republicans had peaked and the Lizard Queen would be the next president.

And you thought that Catholic priests were the worst:

What police say started as a series of inappropriate computer chats and text messages between a female Howard County teacher and a 15-year-old boy led to sexual encounters two years ago that came to light this week and resulted in criminal charges being filed against her.

Kirsten Ann Kinley, 27, became the county’s third teacher since January to be charged with multiple sex offenses involving a minor.

Three teachers in one county in two months. Let’s see, there are 3,150 counties across the country, so multiplied by 3, then again by six indicates that there are at least 56,700 cases of teacher sexual abuse per year… and that doesn’t count all the principals, coaches and janitors.

The annual abuse rate of Catholic priests, on the other hand, is 4,150 cases, including substantiated and unsubstantiated accusations (not criminal charges), over a period of fifty years, which indicates 83 priest-abusers per year.

Of course, there are more teachers than priests, 3 million compared to 44,000. This means that a school child’s chance of being sexually abused by a teacher is 1.89 percent, compared to .19 percent for a priest. So, a teacher isn’t 683 times more likely to go after your child than a priest, they’re only ten times more likely to do so.

Jason Whitlock, as usual, is one of the few sports reporters willing to tell the truth:

Vegas police were simply overwhelmed along The Strip. They were there solely for decoration and to discourage major crimes. Beyond that, they minded their own business.

I was there. Walking The Strip this weekend must be what it feels like to walk the yard at a maximum security prison. You couldn’t relax. You avoided eye contact. The heavy police presence only reminded you of the danger.

The idea that the police provide the basis for civilization has it exactly backwards. The police are brushed aside and revealed for the frauds that they are any time and anywhere that enough people – far fewer than you’d imagine – decide to ignore them. Just ignore them, it’s not even necessary to oppose them much less seek to destroy them.

This is why police are always on edge and why so many more of them succumb to the pressure, because they are perfectly aware that they can be overwhelmed at any time despite all of their many dictated advantages over any single non-police individual.

Think about it. If civilization was a byproduct of effective policing, then installing it in Iraq or New Orleans would merely be a matter of providing the right number of properly trained police. As it stands, not even one hundred and fifty thousand soldiers suffice for the former, and as we know from New Orleans, the police are at least as likely to be a part of the problem as part of the solution.

I would very much like to see a modern urban community try an experiment with banning its police force and encouraging its citizens to take responsibility for policing themselves. I suspect that the results would be rather better than the total chaos that most people, indoctrinated by decades worth of televised pro-police propaganda, would imagine.

On a tangential note, isn’t it interesting that nearly every television drama lionizes the police, lawyers, doctors and government workers? At this rate, in ten years they’ll have to create new government agencies just so television producers will have something to create a show around.

“Don’t miss THE MEAT, Fox’s stunning new show about the hackers of Homeland Security’s elite Internet corps and their fight to stop denial of service attacks and BSD* assaults by domestic Christian terrorists and a shadowy network of international neo-Nazis. Starring Michael Mustafa as Hassan ibn al-Talib, an agent torn between his desire to peacefully destroy Israel and his anger at the religious prejudice he nobly endures at the hands of the very Americans whose freedom he is defending.

*Blue Screen of Death. In the shocking season finale, Agent al-Talib discovers that Windows system crashes are caused by an evil Christian plot designed to cause people to involuntarily invoke the name of their Lord and Savior.

This sort of thing is one of the many reasons why you’ll never see me shedding a tear whenever there’s news about a police officer getting shot:

One of the most appalling cases occurred in Maricopa County, Arizona, the home of Joe Arpaio, self-proclaimed “toughest sheriff in America.” In 2004 one of Arpaio’s SWAT teams conducted a bumbling raid in a Phoenix suburb. Among other weapons, it used tear gas and an armored personnel carrier that later rolled down the street and smashed into a car. The operation ended with the targeted home in flames and exactly one suspect in custody–for outstanding traffic violations.

But for all that, the image that sticks in your head, as described by John Dougherty in the alternative weekly Phoenix New Times, is that of a puppy trying to escape the fire and a SWAT officer chasing him back into the burning building with puffs from a fire extinguisher. The dog burned to death.

In a massive 1998 raid at a San Francisco housing co-op, cops shot a family dog in front of its family, then dragged it outside and shot it again.

When police in Fremont, California, raided the home of medical marijuana patient Robert Filgo, they shot his pet Akita nine times. Filgo himself was never charged.

Last October police in Alabama raided a home on suspicion of marijuana possession, shot and killed both family dogs, then joked about the kill in front of the family. They seized eight grams of marijuana, equal in weight to a ketchup packet.

The police are not the good guys. Society does not depend on them, it would not fall apart without them and it would be much better off without them. Without any of them. They don’t stop crime, in fact, it is demonstrably provable that they don’t even slow it down.

They are a collective fraud. They bust heads, shoot puppies and haul people off to jail, providing the media with pictures to sell the false idea that they are protecting you. Of course, if they were, they’d have more cops on the rape and murder patrol than collecting the driving tax.

No doubt some readers will have the usual hissy fit that my utter lack of regard for the police means that I’m some kind of liberal hippy. But for those who are inclined to believe that, I’d merely ask: what is so conservative, what is so very freedom-loving, about a police state?

When the police put down the machine guns, stop dressing like Darth Vader in a Wehrmacht-style helmet and start behaving politely against instead of knocking down doors and shooting pets, I’ll be happy to reconsider the issue.

To those who don’t accept God’s existence:

If you accept U.S. dollars in exchange for goods and services, have you not demonstrated a HUGE amount of faith in the non-material? The U.S. dollar, after all, has lacked any inherent value since the abandonment of the gold standard.

And if you believe in the value of the dollar only because everyone else does, then why would you refuse to believe in God’s existence for the same reason?

To his credit, Dick Dawkins mentions this briefly, although I don’t recall him dealing with the matter in a substantive manner. It’s an interesting point, especially in light of the studies which have showed that religious people are happier, live longer and are more successful in an evolutionary sense.

Apparently John Edwards has developed a talent for sticking his own foot in his mouth now:

The aggressively photogenic John Edwards was cruising along, detailing his litany of liberal causes last week until, during question time, he invoked the “I” word — Israel. Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace, Edwards remarked, was the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Well, he pissed off the Catholics first and now he’s gunning for the Jews, so perhaps he can leap on the Baptists next or perhaps he should just go right for the Sikhs and those silly knives they insist on carrying around. You know Edwards can’t stand the thought of anyone who would insist on him covering up his beautiful, blow-dried hair with a towel.

In fairness, we all know that Amynda would never have written anything negative about Israel on behalf of Sen. Edwards. Let’s face it, Israel lies pretty far outside her interest zone, indeed, after reading her blog I’m not entirely sure that she’s ever heard of “Canada” or “Mexico”. Had we been so fortunate to have our would-be president promote her to campaign speechwriter, Edwards would surely have been announcing that the greatest short term threat to world peace is penises, white male Duke penises, to be specific.

Can you miss something that never existed in the first place? I just feel this empty sense of an opportunity lost.