Tag: corpocracy

Clearing up the Gab drama

@a of Gab explains what was happening yesterday with regards to Gab:

I want to clear up the confusion about some baseless claims that have been made against myself, the company, @e, and our entire #GabFam earlier today. A few weeks ago we started vetting some potential early investors and senior-level technical employees to help us continue to grow Gab and promote free speech.

We exercised extreme vetting and slowly attempted to build trust, judge character, and team fit. Unfortunately our trust was broken after a toxic attack on our community and libelous falsehoods were sent to the press by certain people we were vetting.

I want to make a few things very clear:

  • The co-founders of Gab are myself and @e. Period.
  • @e and I have completely self-funded Gab by ourselves with no pay for months. 
  • We have not accepted one outside investor. 
  • Our donations Paypal account is a business account and attached to a business bank account. The email address used for the Paypal account is my business email address. I will be updating this to “donate@gab.ai” to clear up confusion. We will be adding much more transparency and value-adds for donors over the next several days. 

We have been attacked by the press. We have been attacked by anonymous trolls. We have been attacked by folks that we trusted and had high hopes for. Each time we have emerged a stronger, more unified community. Thank your for continuing to support us and our mission of putting people first and promoting free speech for all.

I can vouch for @a’s version of events. At the exact same time “certain people” were falsely claiming to have been co-founders of Gab on Gab, there was a concerted script attack on the login page, connected to the page about Gab, which I believe to have been an attempt to edit the page and repeat the same baseless claims there.

SJWs are not the only entryists. Startups, in particular, are often targeted by predatory investors and pseudo-entrepreneurs. And sometimes they are successful. See the history of Facebook for the most notorious example.

Converged beyond belief

A few weeks ago, it became apparent that AirBnB was fully SJW-converged, as they announced plans to try to keep homeowners from being able to discriminate with regards to who was permitted to stay in their homes. But they’re even worse than one might imagine:


Airbnb ‏@Airbnb
We believe in a world where you can #BelongAnywhere. Today there are millions of displaced refugees in need of belonging somewhere.


Airbnb ‏@Airbnb 13 hours ago
We stand #WithRefugees — the millions who have had to leave everything behind, including their homes.

What a creepy pro-invasion image. HERE COME THE DEVIL ZOMBIE PEOPLE! And they’re going to STAY IN YOUR HOUSE! I’ve never used their service before, but taking this stance guarantees that I never will. If you Belong Anywhere, you belong nowhere, to no one.

Convergence at AirBnB

What a pity the stock is not public, because it’s time to short AirBNB. They are no longer in the business of providing connecting people who need places to stay with people who have places to rent, they are now converged and in the business of social justice:

Airbnb has been under fire lately for instances of racism and discrimination exhibited by some hosts on the home-sharing platform. In order to combat that, Airbnb is making several positive changes to the platform and its company policies, Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky sent in an email to hosts and guests this morning.

This includes guaranteeing short-term bookings for people who have been discriminated against, deemphasizing the use of user photos, blocking out availability if a host claims a space is taken when it really isn’t and working to increase the number of Instant Book listings, which don’t require hosts to approve specific guests, to one million by the beginning of 2017.

“Discrimination is the opposite of belonging, and its existence on our platform jeopardizes this core mission,” Chesky wrote. “Bias and discrimination have no place on Airbnb, and we have zero tolerance for them. Unfortunately, we have been slow to address these problems, and for this I am sorry. I take responsibility for any pain or frustration this has caused members of our community. We will not only make this right; we will work to set an example that other companies can follow.”

Airbnb’s issues with racism date back to at least late last year, when a Harvard study showed that renters with black-sounding names were less likely to receive a booking through the site. Then, in June, an Airbnb host in North Carolina canceled a booking on a black person and sent her a slew of racist insults. Shortly after that incident, Chesky said that racism is not allowed on the platform and Airbnb permanently banned the host.

Later that month, the Congressional Black Caucus urged Airbnb to take further action in addressing the issues of racism and discrimination on the company’s platform, citing how Title II of 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in places like hotels and motels on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin.

Today, Laura Murphy, former head of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington D.C. office, laid out Airbnb’s game plan for tackling instances of racism and discrimination on the platform. Airbnb has been working with Murphy since June to ensure that the company is doing everything it can to fight racism.

“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.”
– from SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police

How PACs murdered the Tea Party

Keep the demise of the Tea Party in mind as the Alt-Right grows in popularity. Many, if not most, of these PACs are little more than scams with a political brand.

The Tea Party movement is pretty much dead now, but it didn’t die a natural death. It was murdered—and it was an inside job. In a half decade, the spontaneous uprising that shook official Washington degenerated into a form of pyramid scheme that transferred tens of millions of dollars from rural, poorer Southerners and Midwesterners to bicoastal political operatives.

What began as an organic, policy-driven grass-roots movement was drained of its vitality and resources by national political action committees that dunned the movement’s true believers endlessly for money to support its candidates and causes. The PACs used that money first to enrich themselves and their vendors and then deployed most of the rest to search for more “prospects.” In Tea Party world, that meant mostly older, technologically unsavvy people willing to divulge personal information through “petitions”—which only made them prey to further attempts to lighten their wallets for what they believed was a good cause. While the solicitations continue, the audience has greatly diminished because of a lack of policy results and changing political winds.

I was an employee at one of the firms that ran these operations. But nothing that follows is proprietary or gleaned directly from my employment. The evidence of the scheming is all there in the public record, available for anyone willing to look…. According to Federal Election Commission reports between 80 to 90 percent, and sometimes all the money these PACs get is swallowed in fees and poured into more prospecting. For example, conservative activist Larry Ward created Constitutional Rights PAC. He also runs Political Media, a communications firm. The New York Times reviewed Constitutional Rights’ filings and found: “Mr. Ward’s PAC spends every dollar it gets on consultants, mailings and fund-raising—making no donations to candidates.” Ward justified the arrangement by saying Political Media discounts solicitations on behalf of Constitutional Rights.

Let that sink in. Ward takes his PAC’s money and redistributes it to his company and other vendors for more messaging and solicitations, but suggests critics should rest easy since the PAC gets a discount on Political Media’s normal rate. Constitutional Rights PAC may be extreme but it’s hardly an outlier.

POLITICO last year reviewed the activity of 33 conservative PACs for the 2014 cycle. Combined, they raked in $43 million dollars, according to the POLITICO report. Of that, $39.5 million went to overhead including $6 million to entities owned by PAC operators; candidates got $3 million. Another report analyzed 17 conservative PACs from the 2014 midterm. It came up with different numbers than POLITICO, finding that the bottom 10 PACs in terms of the ratio of spending to actual candidate support received $54,318,498 and spent only $3,621,896 supporting candidates.

Don’t even think about supporting any big-money Alt-Right PACs that come into being in the next 2-5 years. If the real Alt-Right figures want your support, we’ll not only request it directly, but we’ll do so for specific purposes and projects whose progress you can track for yourself. We don’t play the “overhead” game.

Debunking Snopes

A number of people have referred to the Snopes “debunking” of the Hiroshima-Detroit comparison, failing to realize that a) it doesn’t address blacks at all, and, b) I wrote my post in the first place because the supposed debunking was so feeble.

Here is an accurate summary of the Snopes argument.

1. The picture is not of modern-day Hiroshima.


the next image in the set supposedly depicts modern-day Hiroshima — except that it doesn’t. It’s actually a snapshot taken from the Landmark Tower Sky Garden in Yokohama, Japan

That’s true of the pictures to which Snopes was referring. It’s not true of the pictures I used, which one can see is clearly of past and present Hiroshima. Furthermore, Hiroshima is in very good shape today, as Snopes itself admits. One down.


2. The picture of modern Detroit is only of one building.

the thing to note about the use of this image to portray Detroit as a locus of Hiroshima-like devastation is that all we actually see is one long-abandoned, crumbling building. It doesn’t make the case.

That one picture doesn’t conclusively prove the case, but it correctly demonstrates the actual case intended. Detroit’s population is now 36.7 percent of its 1950s peak and is now 83 percent black. 95 percent of the whites who resided there in 1950 have left. The city filed for bankruptcy in 2013. “aerial photos reveal the tiny urban island that is left – a clutter of high-rises surrounded by empty housing plots now covered in grass.” Two down.

3. The picture of Navin Field is from the 1930s, not the 1940s.

Lastly, we’re shown a photo supposedly depicting Detroit in its mid-1940s heyday — except that it was taken in the mid-1930s

So what? That only makes it that much more clear how advanced Detroit was, and how far Detroit has fallen since. This is petty pedantry, as the relevant point is still demonstrated. Three down.

4. It was the Democrats fault, but it wasn’t only their fault.

Did Democrats and Democratic policies play some role in the fall of Detroit? Surely they did. Every Detroit mayor since 1962 has been a Democrat, after all. But Republicans held the seat for the 12 years prior to that, from 1950 through 1961. The Packard plant whose hollowed-out remains were displayed above closed its doors during that time. Whatever blame is to be allotted to politicians must be shared by both Democrats and Republicans on the national level, as well.


Here is a tip: when you admit that the case being made is correct, even in part, it is not a debunking. Four down. There is not one single effective point that was made in this so-called “debunking”.

The ironic thing about those responding to my modified Detroit-Hiroshima comparison with “Snopes says” is that I rebutted the cuckservative “Democrat policies” explanation for the difference between the two cities more effectively than Snopes did by pointing out that if Democrats are responsible for the decline of Detroit, Hiroshima should be even worse, because it was ruled by Socialists for most of the latter half of the 20th century.

Are there other factors that have contributed to the decline of Detroit beyond the fact that 478,112 blacks moved into the city between 1900 and 1960? Certainly. But that doesn’t change the fact that if a city has a choice between being hit by an atomic bomb or acquiring 774,485 new black residents, the available evidence strongly indicates that the former will prove vastly preferable to the latter in the long term.

Globalists caused US decline

Pat Buchanan rightly condemns the globalists for their foolish abuse of American power that has led to a decline of that power:

“Isolationists must not prevail in this new debate over foreign policy,” warns Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. “The consequences of a lasting American retreat from the world would be dire.”

To make his case against the “Isolationist Temptation,” Haass creates a caricature, a cartoon, of America First patriots, then thunders that we cannot become “a giant gated community.”

Understandably, Haass is upset. For the CFR has lost the country.

Why? It colluded in the blunders that have bled and near bankrupted America and that cost this country its unrivaled global preeminence at the end of the Cold War.

No, it was not “isolationists” who failed America. None came near to power. The guilty parties are the CFR crowd and their neocon collaborators, and liberal interventionists who set off to play empire after the Cold War and create a New World Order with themselves as Masters of the Universe.

The USA will retreat from the world whether Americans want to or not, whether the globalists want them to or not, because America has been invaded, parasited, and financially raped, and its military has been methodically misused, since 1965.

The US government is no longer by, of, or for the American people. And that is why it can no longer harness American power. The globalists broke the nation, and in doing so, broke its power.

“The gravest risk since communism”

The Economist sees nationalism as a great evil that is to be defeated rather than the only way to save Western Civilization:

AS POLITICAL theatre, America’s party conventions have no parallel. Activists from right and left converge to choose their nominees and celebrate conservatism (Republicans) and progressivism (Democrats). But this year was different, and not just because Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major party. The conventions highlighted a new political faultline: not between left and right, but between open and closed (see article). Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, summed up one side of this divide with his usual pithiness. “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo,” he declared. His anti-trade tirades were echoed by the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party.

America is not alone. Across Europe, the politicians with momentum are those who argue that the world is a nasty, threatening place, and that wise nations should build walls to keep it out. Such arguments have helped elect an ultranationalist government in Hungary and a Polish one that offers a Trumpian mix of xenophobia and disregard for constitutional norms. Populist, authoritarian European parties of the right or left now enjoy nearly twice as much support as they did in 2000, and are in government or in a ruling coalition in nine countries. So far, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union has been the anti-globalists’ biggest prize: the vote in June to abandon the world’s most successful free-trade club was won by cynically pandering to voters’ insular instincts, splitting mainstream parties down the middle.

News that strengthens the anti-globalisers’ appeal comes almost daily. On July 26th two men claiming allegiance to Islamic State slit the throat of an 85-year-old Catholic priest in a church near Rouen. It was the latest in a string of terrorist atrocities in France and Germany. The danger is that a rising sense of insecurity will lead to more electoral victories for closed-world types. This is the gravest risk to the free world since communism. Nothing matters more than countering it.

Considering that their counter will consist of “stronger rhetoric, bolder policies and smarter tactics”, they’re not off to a good start. They are at a disadvantage, of course, because the most effective rhetoric is utilized in the service of the truth, and they are attempting to sell blatant and obvious lies.

But if “nothing matters more than countering” nationalism, that means that nationalism is the only political objective that matters for the opponents of globalism. We need to continue to expose their lies about NATO benefitting America, about the EU benefitting Europe, about free trade and immigration enriching societies, and how cooperation is necessary for fighting terrorism.

If you’re still foolish enough to swallow the false assertion that free trade is beneficial to America, perhaps you should consider if you believe any of the other lies you are being told by the same people.

The cost of SJW convergence

ESPN is paying it, having lost 4 million subscribers and $350 million in the last year:

In the past five years ESPN has lost 11,346,000 subscribers according to Nielsen data.

If you combine that with ESPN2 and ESPNU subscriber losses this means that ESPN has lost over a billion dollars in cable and satellite revenue just in the past five years, an average of $200 million each year. That total of a billion dollars hits ESPN in the pocketbook not just on a yearly basis, but for every year going forward.

It’s gone forever.

That’s not just bad, this is downright cataclysmic.

And it’s getting worse.

In the past year ESPN lost 4.159 million subscribers, that’s another $350 million in lost revenue across the ESPN family of networks.

Now, tell me again how all the cultural programming and SJWfication and ideological propaganda in the entertainment media and the advertising industry is just business. Tell me again how it’s not driven by ideological fanatics, but hard-nosed businessmen just ruthlessly chasing a buck the best way they know how.

And then I’ll explain to you, very slowly and in words of not more than five syllables, that those hard-nosed, buck-chasing “businessmen” are observably losing literal billions as they continue to tear away at the foundations of Western Civilization: Christianity, the family, the rule of law, and the white race in the name of Tolerance, Equality, Progress, Inclusiveness, and Diversity.

The pillaging of Russia

Why the globalists hate Vladimir Putin and why they are terrified that Donald Trump will win the US election:

The international interests that financially wrecked Russia in the ’90s are doing the same to the United States now. Putin stopped them in Russia and Trump is promising to stop them in America. They recognize Trump as the enemy and slander in the only style they know—the paranoid style.

“The international interests that financially wrecked Russia in the ’90s are doing the same to the United States now.”

Trump was once blamed for praising Putin’s performance. But he was right. Pensions, salaries, GDP, and the value of gold reserves in Russia have risen greatly since 1999—in some cases tenfold or more. This was while both inflation and the debt-to-GDP ratio declined by orders of magnitude. The rise in living standard under Putin is reflected in longer life expectancy: It had dropped to a third-world level during the 1990s, to around 55–57, and has now risen back up to 70 by most measures. Birthrates have normalized and recently overtaken the United States. Visit Moscow and you will see infrastructure, buildings, and development that are more impressive than those found in any American city—though the same could be said, of course, for many other countries now.

By contrast, Russians remember the liberal and globalist experiment of the ’90s as a time of great suffering. The early death of literally millions of people from economic deprivation, the utter ruin of many of Russia’s formerly world-class industries: This is the legacy of economic liberalization in Russia. How did it happen?

In short, “entrepreneurs” would run fraudulently acquired businesses into the ground, fire-sale the assets internationally, and move abroad with the profits. This is globalism in its purest form, without the slogans and boosterism. American economists, academics, and businessmen played an important part in all of this. Marc Rich—a fugitive later pardoned by Bill Clinton—was, for example, “the largest trader of Russia’s oil and aluminum on a spot basis,” according to Steve Sailer, who has documented the “rape of Russia” in some detail. George Soros was a large investor in these ventures, which provided the international market with financial backing, and cover for the oligarchs’ robbery of their own people. This was done especially under Boris Jordan’s CS First Boston bank and later Renaissance Capital, Moscow “investment banks” staffed by Soros associates.

Even more important was a group of Harvard and MIT economists who advised and assisted the Russian government in the reforms. These are men still involved in public life in the United States: current vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Stanley Fischer, Jeffrey Sachs, Jonathan Hay, Andrei Shleifer, and Larry Summers, who was later Secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton. As late as 1998, months before Russia defaulted, Fischer claimed that the Yeltsin regime had to be praised for following the advice of this group. Using the rhetoric of liberalization and globalism, American academics and financiers played a key role in the pillaging of Russia.

The fact that those who financially raped Russia are opposed to Donald Trump is, in itself, reason to support the man’s campaign for the Presidency. And for those who are inclined to cry “anti-semitism” due to the (((heritage))) of more than a few of the individuals named, is this sort of behavior really the sort of thing you want to go on the public record defending?

The Economist was right about one thing. The battle is no longer about Left and Right factions of a nation, but rather, between Globalism and Nationalism. It’s the battle between vampires and humans. And if you support Globalism, you’re on the wrong side, no matter who you are or why you support it.

Chinese buy Opera

This should shake things up in the browser world, to say the least:

After a $1.2 billion deal fell through, Opera has sold most of itself to a Chinese consortium for $600 million. The buyers, led by search and security firm Qihoo 360, are purchasing Opera’s browser business, its privacy and performance apps, its tech licensing and, most importantly, its name. The Norwegian company will keep its consumer division, including Opera Apps & Games and Opera TV. The consumer arm has 560 workers, but the company hasn’t said what will happen to its other 1,109 employees.

The original deal, announced in February, reportedly failed to gain regulatory approval. While expressing disappointment that it was scrapped, Opera CEO Lars Boilesen says “we believe that the new deal is very good for Opera employees and Opera shareholders.” The acquisition was approved by Opera’s board, and the company now has 18 months to find a new name, according to Techcrunch.

That’s great news for Brendan Eich and Brave, which is already the best browser out there. I still use Pale Moon for a few things, but 85 percent of my work is now done on Brave.

Anyhow, I would not advise using Opera or OperaMail anymore. It’s bad enough to share things with the US government through Google and Microsoft, but this is a whole new can of worms.