Tag: media

Anonymous Conservative suspects others are taking credit for my observations:

Renowned Yale computer scientist David Gelernter claims that he is abandoning Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. It is at the point I would assume he is doing this on orders from Cabal, so he can be the voice reciting Vox Day’s arguments, and get credit for overturning it. The alternative is Vox gets credit, and then gets a platform, which would also elevate Castalia House, at which point his threat level would go through the roof.

First of all, I very much doubt I’m the first unauthorized individual to happen to notice that the math of the Neo-Darwinian hypothesis doesn’t add up correctly with the growing amount of evidence being produced on an ongoing basis by genetic scientists. Gelernter is a smart guy and I would expect him as well as lot of other smart people to reach much the same conclusions on the basis of the available evidence. Second, I find it hard to imagine that anyone, however evil-minded, cares all that much about an increasingly outdated hypothesis that not only has more epicycles spinning around it than the most die-hard pre-Copernican astronomer ever rationalized, but is inevitably destined to be discarded sooner or later.

And third, I genuinely don’t care about this sort of “credit” anymore than I care about collecting academic credentials. Observing the obvious is not doing anything new. It’s not accomplishing anything. It’s like being the guy who “discovered” the Okapi. He didn’t discover anything! The Okapi was always there! The Neo-Darwinian hypothesis has always been false, so literally everyone who ever doubted for any reason, convincing or unconvincing, merits the same “credit”.

If – when – I write a truly great novel or produce a genuinely great film, then I’ll be happy to accept any plaudits that are due, buy a monastery, and collect books. But noticing what is true or not true is not an accomplishment, it’s simply a consequence of paying attention.

I already distrust the trappings of fame, money, and media attention due to observing the negative effects they have had on others I have known. The suggestion that there is a shadowy international cabal of evil sex predators intent on controlling who is authorized to go on television and bask in the adoration of the masses doesn’t exactly make the whole program appear any more attractive to me. It’s just one of the many reasons I don’t talk to the media anymore.

A book recommendation from ex-Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies:

ZV: I actually want to recommend a book called SJWS ALWAYS LIE by Vox Day. That’s the only book that I would recommend that someone would read.

AJ: We do sell it in our store. That’s one of the few books I’ve read the last year, I’ve been so busy. Yeah, they always lie!

ZV: They always lie, and the thing is is that people that aren’t familiar with the tactics, you know, because this is weaponized. They don’t understand what’s going on and so they’re likely to make a bunch of mistakes they think that they just capitulate and like apologize then it’s just gonna go away.

AJ: Oh no! A few years ago I’m like well I’m not really saying that about Sandy Hook but if you say I’m hurting you and sending people to your house, I never did that but I apologize, that’s when they just full-metal attacked!

ZV: Yeah they double down and the thing is is that they’re gonna parade your apology around and say well, you know, he admits to this and that, he’s like X, Y, or Z bad person and then they’re gonna use that and they’re gonna parade it around. And this is not something that people understand intuitively and so the thing is, get this book, SJWS ALWAYS LIE by Vox Day and read it. It’s a fascinating read and it goes by really quickly, and it’s kind of a funny title but

AJ: The point is stop capitulating, stop kissing their ass.

ZV: Yes, exactly. Exactly…. So I followed this book, basically, as a tactical operation manual on how I was going to leak this information.

That is arguably the best review SJWAL has received yet. I’ll be talking with Zach on Alex’s show today at 2 PM EST.

That’s the rumor swirling around Tucker Carlson’s unexpected vacation:

Rumors are swirling that Tucker Carlson’s sudden “vacation” from his Fox News show was actually a suspension, with some even suggesting that Ben Shapiru could ultimately take his place.

Carlson faced a firestorm of criticism following his assertion last week after two mass shootings that paranoia in America over white supremacy was a “hoax” and that the country faced far bigger problems.

He then announced he would be taking a short holiday.

“By the way,” Carlson told viewers on Wednesday last week, “I am taking several days off – headed to the wilderness to fish with my son.”

Fox News claims that Carlson’s vacation had been planned before the contentious remarks and that he will return on August 19.

However, as CNN noted, there is a long history of Fox News hosts taking sudden vacations when they are embroiled in controversies, including Laura Ingraham, Judge Jeanine, Sean Hannity, Jesse Watters and Bill O’Reilly, who never returned.

Numerous high profile individuals at Fox News have also refused to comment on Carlson’s “vacation.”

Journalist Patrick Howley even suggested that Ben Shapiru was being lined up to replace Tucker. “The establishment is determined to move Shapiru into 8 o’clock instead of Tucker, and they figure the conservative movement is too stupid to notice the difference.”

The little guy sold his soul to get on TV, so it’s only fair that they give him the chance to publicly flame out in spectacular fashion.

I am literally shaking at the lack of respect shown for the Muslim readers of this blog and their time-honored Islamic traditions by Wired author Nitasha Tiku in her most recent attempt to rewrite history and defend a small group of IQ-challenged SJWs employed by Google:

By Saturday, a full copy of Damore’s document had leaked to Gizmodo. While Googlers waited for an official response from the top, managers who wanted to signal their support for women loudly condemned the memo’s ideas on internal Google+ posts.

To Liz Fong-Jones, a site reliability engineer at Google, the memo’s arguments were especially familiar. Google’s engineers are not unionized, but inside Google, Fong-Jones essentially performed the function of a union rep, translating employee concerns to managers on everything from product decisions to inclusion practices. She had acquired this informal role around the time the company released Google+ to the public in 2011; before launch, she warned executives against requiring people to use their real names on the platform, arguing that anonymity was important for vulnerable groups. When public uproar played out much as Fong-Jones had predicted, she sat across from executives to negotiate a new policy—then explained the necessary compromises to irate employees. After that, managers and employees started coming to her to mediate internal tensions of all sorts.

As part of this internal advocacy work, Fong-Jones had become attuned to the way discussions about diversity on internal forums were beset by men like Cernekee, Damore, and other coworkers who were “just asking questions.” To her mind, Google’s management had allowed these dynamics to fester for too long, and now it was time for executives to take a stand. In an internal Google+ post, she wrote that “the only way to deal with all the heads of the medusa is to no-platform all of them.”

A few hours later, Google’s internal networks received a shock to the system. A screenshot of Fong-Jones’ “Medusa” comment appeared on Vox Popoli, a blog run by the alt-right instigator Theodore Beale, along with her full name and profile photo. The comments section quickly filled with racial and sexual slurs fixated personally on Fong-Jones, who is trans. “They should pitch all those sexual freaks off of rooftops,” one anonymous Vox Popoli commenter wrote.

I’m not sure what is more offensive, the fact that Ms Tiku failed to note Fong-Jones’s graecophobic failure to distinguish between the Hydra and the Medusa or her own blatant failure to respect the traditional Muslim way of addressing sexual deviancy. And I note that it’s been nearly 20 months and Ms Tiku is still trying to establish the Narrative and falsely portray the Google freaks who have been bullying everyone inside the company, from the CEO on down to the lowliest crypto-conservative, as the victims.

And if anyone at Google is under the impression that they received a shock to the system back then, they can be deeply and profoundly grateful that they didn’t take Fong-Jones’s advice at the time. Oh, and by the way, Ms Tiku, as long as Wired is fixated on the shenanigans of sexual deviants at Google, you should probably ask Mr. Brin and Mr. Schmidt exactly what they were doing in Jeffrey Epstein’s company.

Then again, consistency has never been a strong point of the establishment media:

The BBC is facing accusations of “hypocrisy” for describing Kashmir as “Indian occupied,” with people asking why it doesn’t apply similar descriptions to Northern Ireland.
The query was first put to the British broadcaster on Sunday by British-Indian film director Shekhar Kapur and it quickly went viral.

“Hey @BBCWorld.. each time you call Kashmir ‘Indian Occupied Kashmir’ I keep wondering why you refuse to call Northern Ireland ‘British Occupied Ireland’?” Kapur asked in a tweet that rapidly racked up more than 20,000 retweets and over 50,000 likes. Other responses to Kapur’s message accused the state-owned media company of applying the “occupied” tag to other regions including Tibet, Hong Kong and Balochistan. It also prompted the creation of the #BritishOccupiedIreland hashtag, which also picked up retweet traffic. 

Either Northern Ireland is British-occupied or there is no reason to complain about the New Kashmiri immigrants, who despite being Hindu are every bit as genuinely Kashmiri as the Muslims who preceded them.

As you’ve probably heard me say on occasion, I genuinely don’t care what Suzy said to Jenny about Sara. Or about me, for that matter. This Internet drama is literally never-ending and there is always something at which one can decide to take offense if one chooses.

So, from this point on, I’m going to do my best to completely ignore literally everyone else who isn’t an active enemy of Western civilization and refuse to answer any questions about what I happen to think about anyone else. For example, I think it was a mistake to answer questions about Jared Taylor no matter how idiotic I might happen to believe his decision to engage with CNN was, just as I think it would be a mistake to weigh in publicly regarding the bitter dispute between Owen Benjamin and Mike Cernovich.* I should have just kept my mouth shut and refused to answer the question.

So, please keep this in mind when you are asking me questions in the future. Don’t even bother asking “what do you think about X” if X is a public figure, however petty. The answer to all such questions is: “I probably don’t, at all, but in the unlikely event that I do, I’m not going to tell you.”

I will, of course, continue to express my opinions of the various enemies of Western civilization, especially those who fraudulently pose as its defenders. By which I mean the likes of Jordan Peterson, Dennis Prager, and Ben Shapiro.

* There isn’t any such dispute. I’m making a general point here.

In case you’re wondering why I never, ever take cries about “anti-semitism” at face value, this expose about the behind-the-scenes editorial action at Vanity Fair may help explain why:

One aspect of the story seemed like it would be the most delicious candy to Vanity Fair in that era: Bloom, expecting to make a life-altering killing on the stock, had built a multimillion-dollar house near Sun Valley, Idaho. I put in the God-is-in-the-details goodies: I remember there was a jacuzzi room graced with a large Buddha’s head. But things had gone south so fast with Planet Hollywood that Bloom was forced to put the house on the market before he really got to enjoy it. Not only was it a matter of public record, it was a perfect metaphor for hubris and thwarted ambition.

But Bloom told me that I absolutely could not mention the house — not because the anecdote was embarrassing but because, he said, there were armed anti-Semites in the area where he had chosen to build who might attack him. Bloom didn’t explain why he would want to spend time and money in an area where he thought his life was at risk, or why he thought the local killers would know nothing about a house valued — if memory serves — at $15 million until they … read about it in Vanity Fair.

The more he demanded that I omit any mention of the house, the more determined I was to include it. Then I got a call from a Graydon underling. There was a problem fitting in the piece, she said, and the one thing that needed to be cut was the house. I said I could easily suggest other parts of this overly long story that could be trimmed but no, it had to be the house.

Was including the house important in the grand scheme of things? Maybe not. But I felt that I was being sold out. I was confident that kind of information would not have been cut for anyone other than a Graydon friend. In the end, Bloom didn’t look great in the piece, but at least he got to sell his house without embarrassment.

On the one hand, you really can’t blame anyone for making use of a tactic that has reliably worked proved effective over the years, however dishonestly it is utilized. On the other, you absolutely can and should blame the morons who are dumb enough to continue falling for that tactic, over and over again, for a period of decades.

And like the author, I too very much doubt Mr. Carter’s explanation for why he scrubbed the Epstein article.

Imagine what this guy will conclude when he learns that I occasionally appear on Zhongnanhai state television.

Alt-right blogger Vox Day has taken to linking to Russia Today as a news source on topics various and sundry, making his site an interesting test case for studying the injection of Kremlin state media into the Western extreme right.

This is an interesting observation for several reasons. The thing is, both Zhongnanhai and Kremlin state media are far more intelligent, and also far more accurate about the West than the Western corpocratic media. This minor issue of media sources utilized on an individual’s blog actually presages a much larger issue, which will be the neoliberals’ eventual realization that by attempting to banish what they call “the Western extreme right” from everything from social media to payment processors, white Christian men with a right-of-center perspective will sooner or later realize that neoliberalism is the central problem and ally with all of its other enemies against it.

The Big Tech companies of the West had a head start, but they have blown their advantage by converging and trying to transform their techno-ecosystem into a weaponized system of extragovernmental social and political control. But their behavior means no one trusts them inside or outside the West. What would you rather use if you were in India, Iran, or Nigeria, a Paypal platform you know will deplatform you for badkthink or an Alipay platform out of China that won’t? Would you rather use Facebook, which will gleefully report your badthink to your government, or VKontakte, which will not?

The global demographics and economies of scale are stacked very heavily against the converged corpocracies of the West, especially since they are purposefully creating competitors able to foxnews them by attacking at least one-third of their own customer base. And if the SJW corpocrats didn’t want us to find common cause with their much larger foreign competitors, then they should not have attacked, deplatformed, and demonetized us.

Perhaps if they were better versed in Western civilization, they would have been aware of the way in which Hubris inspires Nemesis.

Apparently lying to all of the people all of the time in exchange for advertising revenue is a suboptimal business strategy:

The struggling US media industry is facing its worst year for job layoffs in a decade as news organizations continue to cut staff and close shop, according to a new survey.

The consultancy Challenger Gray & Christmas reported this week that media companies, which include movies, television, publishing, music, and broadcast and print news, announced plans to cut 15,474 jobs so far this year, of which 11,878 of which were from news organizations.

That is nearly three times more than the 4,062 cuts announced in the media sector in 2017 and the highest total since the economic crisis in 2009.

“Members of the media, especially journalists, have had a tough few years,” said Andrew Challenger, vice president of the Chicago-based firm.

“Many jobs were already in jeopardy due to a business model that tried to meet consumer demand for free news with ad revenue. As media outlets attempted to put news behind pay walls, in many markets, consumers opted not to pay.”

Interesting, is it not, that they can’t find subscribers… because literally no one actually wants or needs what they are offering. When the Devil already has Google and Facebook and Disney, the ability to further deceive people on a regional or local level is of severely declining marginal utility.

Jared Taylor is upset because he talked to CNN and – surprise, surprise – he discovered that they are going to make him look bad on TV. How unutterably stupid do you have to be to voluntarily speak to the media these days? How difficult is it to understand that they are your sworn and dedicated enemy? Of course, the guy – he must be a Boomer – is still convinced that the executive producer who set him up is sincere and professional.

In April, CNN asked me for an interview with one of its hosts, Fareed Zakaria, as part of an hour-long program on “white nationalism.” I was reluctant. Programs of this kind don’t try to understand why people become “white nationalists.” They just dismiss them as “racists,” “haters,” and “white supremacists.”

I reluctantly agreed to the interview, writing to Miss McGuirk: “Against my own nature, I grow cynical. Still, I will permit myself to hope that the word ‘hate’ will not be in the title of your program and that my interview will not be sandwiched between footage of goose-steppers and cross-burners.”

CNN’s investigation of white nationalism will air on June 30, according to a note I received from Miss McGuirk:

The program is scheduled to run this Sunday night at 8PM ET—and Fareed will also feature part of your interview on his program at 10AM and 1PM ET. One caveat—when news breaks, CNN will sometimes postpone the air time. If that occurs, I will let you know the next air time.

Miss McGuirk did not mention that the title of CNN’s hour-long, even-handed, “serious treatment of White Nationalism” is called “State of Hate: The Explosion of White Supremacy.” This somehow undercut her cheerful assurance: “I believe you will feel your views are presented fairly and thoroughly.”

Liza McGuirk has been unfailingly prompt, professional, and polite. I cannot bring myself to doubt her sincerity. She edited the program, and maybe it deserves a different title. I will leave it to others to decide.

People have occasionally asked me what I think of Jared Taylor. Since I never paid him any attention at all, I did not have an answer for them. Now I do. I think he is stupid, naive, and attention-seeking.

What part of “don’t talk to the media” is hard for these idiotic narcissists to understand? This sort of thing is precisely why I don’t do interviews with anyone anymore. I learned my lesson after that Sad Puppies interview with Wired in 2015. No more interviews, period.* Not with CNN, not with YouTubers, not with aspiring journalists in high school, not with journalism majors at university, not with the New York Times, and definitely not with [insert your favorite content creator]. Don’t bother asking me if I will talk to [fill-in-the-blank]. The answer is no.

The only reason I will do the occasional interview is if I happen to know and trust the other individual. But if I want to talk to someone, I’m much more inclined to talk to them on my turf and on my terms, rather than on theirs.

*Although I turn down the vast majority of interview requests I receive, I have made a few exceptions over the last four years. I talked to Amanda Robb of Rolling Stone about the success of Castalia House, which interview she later tried, unsuccessfully, to use in an NPR hit piece about comics. I also talked to Bleeding Cool as part of their retraction of falsely labeling me a “white supremacist”, I talked to Jesse Lee Peterson as part of his fund-raising week, and I occasionally talk to Alex Jones and Owen Benjamin on their shows. Given the way in which Ms Robb subsequently tried to interfere with our crowdfunding at Indiegogo and how the Bleeding Cool editor-in-chief lost his job after the 17,000-word interview ran, the evidence suggests that even these exceptions were unwise.