Featured Articles

Rational Dialog with BLM Is Not Possible

/102 Comments/in , /by

If we are to judge from recent events, BLM protestors (and a seemingly overwhelming percentage of Blacks in general) don’t seem able to discern the difference between the impression created by a few seconds of a video clip, and the reality and attendant circumstances behind that video.  They know how they feel when they watch a Black apparently being mistreated by police, but any further deductive reasoning is from that point quite impossible.  The combination of ignorance and moral certainty is dangerous, as we see in the Dallas shooting of police and other violent protests last weekend.

In their mind, Black Lives Matter protesters have the “evidence” already, because they think that evidence simply means something unpleasant caught on camera.  From there they demand immediate retribution, without further deliberation in the legal process.  It is ironic that one of the BLM protesters’ trite chants is “No justice, no peace,” considering their complete disregard for the judicial process.  But they are good at disturbing the peace, we’ll have to give them that.

The chanting of slogans seems to be the tool of the cognitively incompetent, because it conveniently avoids discussing any facts.  The rallying cry, “Hands up, don’t shoot,” is based on a mendacious account of the Michael Brown incident, who did not have his hands up when confronted by Darren Wilson, and did not say “don’t shoot,” but rather went for the cop’s gun.  The “Black Lives Matter” chant is repeated in a zombie-like fashion by the protesters.  But note that every slogan is based on a faulty premise: that justice has been derailed, that innocent Blacks are being shot, and that the government has somehow devalued Black lives.  “We have nothing to lose but our chains,” they chant, enraptured in an orgy of victimization and delusion. Read more

Theresa May — Friend of Israel and the Organized Jewish Community

/72 Comments/in , /by
Anyone wondering about the priorities of Mrs Theresa May should follow her actions from the moment she learned she was to become Britain’s next Prime Minister.
Her first act was to sign a pledge committing her to remember the Holocaust and “stand up to hatred and intolerance”. And her second  was to spend the evening before her confirmation by the Queen at a private dinner at the home of Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis.
Whatever else awaits the British people, they can be under no doubt that their new leader is once again a true Friend of Israel.

In a parliamentary career marked by cowardice and a tendency to go along with whichever political wind is blowing, it is hard to say which has been Mrs Theresa May’s most inglorious moment.  Was it her decision, as Home Secretary, to throw open Britain’s borders and allow immigration to arise to record levels — after being elected specifically on a promise to reduce it?  Perhaps it was her plans to target “non-violent extremists” via blacklists, internet free-speech restrictions and movement bans?

For many nationalists, the most egregious moment in this wretched woman’s career came in a speech she gave at the Finchley United Synagogue in April 2015 when she defiled the memory of British servicemen killed in Palestine 1939 — 1948 by praising, instead, their Jewish terrorist killers.

So as today we celebrate the independence of the state of Israel and pay our respects to those who have fought so hard for it…. We remember the sacrifice of those who fought to achieve and protect that independence….

Thus the woman about to become the British Prime Minister tarnished the sacrifice of an estimated 784 British servicemen, police and crown officers killed in what is — for the Friends of Israel — one of the most embarrassing episodes in British colonial history (see Note below). She did not even have the decency to deliver this stab in the back behind closed doors. Read more

White Men Can’t Jump, Black Men Can’t Shot-Put

/64 Comments/in , /by

 

raceandsport_frontcoverRace and Sport: Evolution and Racial Differences in Sporting Ability
Edward Dutton and Richard Lynn
London: Ulster Institute for Social Research, 2015

 

The Ulster Institute’s latest study in human differences will come as a pleasant surprise to those who have complained about their previous somewhat narrow focus on IQ. Race and Sport is not the first book to venture into the taboo area of innate racial differences in athletic aptitude, but it is the most thorough and systematic so far.

The ice was first broken by Jon Entine’s Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We’re Afraid to Talk About It (2000). Numerous publishing houses rejected this work before it could see the light of day; some publishers were explicit about their fear that discussion of innate Black superiority in sport would lead inevitably to genetic explanations for low Black intelligence. A more serious objection to Mr. Entine’s thesis is that there are many sports Blacks do not dominate, and not all of these are winter sports (where an environmental explanation might be convincing).

Dutton and Lynn see reason for cautious optimism in the relative lack of furor surrounding the more recent publication of David Epstein’s The Sports Gene: What Makes the Perfect Athlete (2013). Epstein accepts that athletic ability is partly genetic in origin, although he does not focus on this matter. Read more

Mark Zuckerberg: A Re-Incarnation of Marie Antoinette?

/77 Comments/in , /by

Antoinette

“Let them eat cake”

FinishedWall-zuckerberg-6-30-16

Mark Zuckerberg’s Hawaiian wall: “Let them suffer higher population density outside my wall”

News Item: Mark Zuckerberg builds a 6-foot wall on his 1150-acre Hawaiian estate, much to the annoyance of neighbors.

It seems that ultra-billionaire Mark Zuckerberg wants two things. Privacy and space. Lots of space. His Hawaiin digs for example, now consist of 1150 acres, protected in part by a tall ugly wall. Read more

Our Elites Care Less about Economics than Allegiance to Our Glorious Multicultural Future

/49 Comments/in , /by

For all the talk of the middle class, the working class, the elite, fair shares, and globalization, this year’s election has shown how little economics matters. Partisans of each school of economic thought have stopped quibbling with one another and suddenly have come to agree with about one thing: stopping Donald Trump. A sort of circling of the wagons has occurred in which the Keynesians, the supply-siders, the Marxists, and the socialists have taken a rest from shooting at one another in order to eviscerate the Donald. As it turns out, they all don’t hate each other nearly as much as one would’ve guessed a year ago.

Paul Krugman, the welfare-state advocating court economist of the New York Times seems to have gotten the ball rolling last fall when he wrote a column called “Trump is Right on Economics.” Therein, Dr. Krugman ridiculed Jeb Bush (remember him?) for having attacked Mr. Trump for advocating higher taxes on the wealthy instead of attacking his racism. Dr. Krugman wrote in his typical acerbic tone:

Mr. Bush hasn’t focused on what’s truly vicious and absurd — viciously absurd? — about Mr. Trump’s platform, his implicit racism and his insistence that he would somehow round up 11 million undocumented immigrants and remove them from our soil. Instead, Mr. Bush has chosen to attack Mr. Trump as a false conservative, a proposition that is supposedly demonstrated by his deviations from current Republican economic orthodoxy: his willingness to raise taxes on the rich, his positive words about universal health care. And that tells you a lot about the dire state of the G.O.P. For the issues the Bush campaign is using to attack its unexpected nemesis are precisely the issues on which Mr. Trump happens to be right, and the Republican establishment has been proved utterly wrong.

Read more

Noam Chomsky: The Cleverest Zionist

/94 Comments/in , /by

Noam_Chomsky_WSF_-_2003

Noam Chomsky is one of the most influential intellectuals in the world and is indeed probably the single most influential Left-wing intellectual around today. His university, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, once boasted that Chomsky was the most-cited living person in the Arts and Humanities citation index between 1980 and 1992. Indeed, he was the only living author in the top ten, being quoted beside Shakespeare, Plato, and the Bible. Chomsky has largely maintained his academic influence, being heavily quoted in books in the humanities.

The elderly Chomsky is something of a saint for the far-Left. Thus they have been alarmed at a strange, under-reported reality: Chomsky the anti-nationalist and anti-imperialist voice is, when all is said and done, a Zionist supporter of the ethnically-Jewish state of Israel. Read more

Hit by a Hate-Quake: Brexit, Saint Jo and the Liberal Elite

/77 Comments/in , /by

Guardian appeal for migrants

One of the most memorable stories in Boswell’s Life of Johnson (1791) is about Johnson “passing by a fishmonger who was skinning an eel alive.” Johnson heard the fishmonger “curse it, because it would not lie still.” Boswell said the story was a “striking instance of human insensibility and inconsideration.” Those traits are still flourishing. If you think of the eel as ordinary White Britons and the fishmonger as Britain’s liberal elite, the elite are horrified and indignant that the lower orders won’t “lie still” as their country is invaded, their incomes slashed and their futures destroyed. The victory for Brexit in the EU referendum has been greeted by a howl of liberal rage. The lower orders did not vote as their ethical and intellectual superiors wanted them to.

“What nobler vision?”

Worse still, the lower orders refused to be swayed by the murder of the Labour MP Jo Cox, despite being clearly told that she was one of the saintliest women ever to draw breath. A Guardian editorial described the murder as both an “exceptionally heinous villainy” and, “in a very real sense, an attack on democracy.” The editorial went on:

Jo Cox, however, was not just any MP doing her duty. She was also an MP who was driven by an ideal. The former charity worker explained what that ideal was as eloquently as anyone could in her maiden speech last year. “Our communities have been deeply enhanced by immigration,” she insisted, “be it of Irish Catholics across the constituency or of Muslims from Gujarat in India or from Pakistan, principally from Kashmir. While we celebrate our diversity, what surprises me time and time again as I travel around the constituency is that we are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.”

What nobler vision can there be than that of a society where people can be comfortable in their difference? And what more fundamental tenet of decency is there than to put first and to cherish all that makes us human, as opposed to what divides one group from another? These are ideals that are often maligned when they are described as multiculturalism, but they are precious nonetheless. They are the ideals which led Ms Cox to campaign tirelessly for the brutalised and displaced people of Syria, and — the most painful thought — ideals for which she may now have died. (The Guardian view on Jo Cox: an attack on humanity, idealism and democracy, The Guardian, 16th June 2016)

Pass a sickbag, please. Elsewhere, Jo Cox’s family said that “she was a human being and she was perfect.” She was described by her local vicar as “a 21st-century Good Samaritan” and as “someone with whom Jesus would have been so pleased.” There was a schmaltzy memorial service at Parliament led by Rose Hudson Wilson, the Black female chaplain of the House of Commons. The Labour MP Emily Thornberry, notorious for her contempt for White working-class men, recited from “a poem by Kurdish writer Zeki Majid called Mother’s Day.” Read more