vdare--2020-01-10--Radio Derb: Harvey  On Trial, Joe Biden's Plan,  Legalizing Jaywalking, And Banning "Illegal", Etc.

09m21s Vagabonds and strumpets .
( Unwittingly into the bathroom . )
18m02s The order-liberty cycle .
( Swinging from @ @ @ @ @ ) 25m13s When Joe Biden was right .
( And when Stalin died . )
@ @ @ @ @ .
( ARE YOU KIDDING ME ? )

00m47s Emmanuel Weinstein. (Harvey on trial.)
09m21s Vagabonds and strumpets. (Unwittingly into the bathroom.)
18m02s The order-liberty cycle. (Swinging from one to the other.)
25m13s When Joe Biden was right. (And when Stalin died.)
32m43s Flagrant racism in de Blasio's New York. (Ticketing jaywalkers.)
34m52s Those triggering capital letters. (ARE YOU KIDDING ME?)
36m05s Banning "illegal alien." (Get yourself a prejudometer.)
38m52s Signoff. (With the British Coolidge.)
[Music clip: Haydn's Derbyshire March No. 1, organ version]
01—Intro. And Radio Derb is on the air! Greetings, listeners, from your glibly genial host John Derbyshire.
This has been one of those weeks when the main political news, domestic and foreign, didn't much stir my interest. I am therefore going to take an aimless ramble though the broader cultural scene
[Permalink]
02—Emmanuel Weinstein. As I'm recording this podcast on Friday, it's Day Five of the trial of movie producer Harvey Weinstein. Weinstein faces five charges: two counts of predatory sexual assault, two of rape, and one more of a criminal sex act. Altogether he could get 28 years in prison. He's 67 years old.
Weinstein is actually a Goldstein. I mean, he's being put in front of us the way Emmanuel Goldstein was put in front of the workers at the Ministry of Truth in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four: as an Enemy of the People, whose image was to be cursed and spat at during the Two Minutes Hate.
Looking up the relevant passage in that novel just now, to make sure I got Goldstein's name right—the fact-checkers here at VDARE.com can be pretty ferocious, let me tell you—I found myself reading this passage from Chapter One. Everyone is seated in the conference hall and the Two Minutes Hate has just started. Quote:
As usual, the face of Emmanuel Goldstein, the Enemy of the People, had flashed on to the screen. There were hisses here and there among the audience. The little sandy-haired woman gave a squeak of mingled fear and disgust.
End quote.
It so happened that just half an hour before reading that, I had been enjoying my breakfast over this morning's copy of the New York Post. Here's a quote from page 14 of the Post. The story is about events on Thursday in the Weinstein trial. That was the third day of jury selection. Quote from the New York Post:
After Justice James Burke summoned 120 jurors into the courtroom, packing the gallery and jury box, he announced the name of the case: "The People of the State of New York Against Harvey Weinstein."
"Oh, s—t!" exclaimed one female juror, seated in the jury box, as she glanced at the fallen Hollywood titan at the defense table. ["Juror says 'Oh, s—t!' after learning she may be on Harvey Weinstein case" by Rebecca Rosenberg; NY Post, January 10th 2020.]
End quote.
Obviously this is the little sandy-haired woman from Orwell's novel, escaped somehow from the realm of fiction into the so-called "real world." Or if not anything so metaphysically improbable, it is surely at least a very exquisite instance of life imitating art.
You may infer from all that that my sympathies—you can say "prejudices," if you like—are with Harvey Weinstein here. Well, yes, they are.
I don't know Weinstein personally—never met him. I do know him very slightly at one remove. I mean, I know someone who knows him. That would be Taki Theodoracopulos, who I worked for in the decade we just left—who, indeed, once granted a full 38-minute interview to Radio Derb. Taki was friends with Weinstein, and so far as I know still is. He speaks well of him.
So I have trouble getting on board with this particular Two Minutes Hate. In fact I have double trouble. I was strongly impressed by Dorothy Rabinowitz's 2003 book No Crueler Tyrannies, about the child sex-abuse hysteria of the 1990s. I was so strongly impressed, I see on a site search that I have mentioned the book six times over the years. At fifty podcasts a year over fifteen years that's not obsessive, but it tells you how well the Rabinowitz book sensitized me to the weird mass hysterias that sweep over the American public from time to time.
The MeToo movement is, according to me, one of those hysterias. It has all the components: fantasizing plaintiffs coached by avaricious trial lawyers, jurors carefully selected for ignorance and gullibility, politically ambitious prosecutors, trial judges steeped in the Cultural Marxism of lefty law schools … it's all there.
And the real driving force, the energizing principle behind these hysterias, is the CultMarx loathing of some aspect of normal human life. In the child sex abuse hysteria it was loathing of the family; in MeToo it's loathing of male sexuality—or, as the Social Justice Warriors say, "toxic masculinity."
I see I'm going to need another segment on the Harvey Weinstein case. Before I go to it, let me just give you another quote from this morning's New York Post story.
This quote follows immediately on from the previous one. So the little sandy-haired woman, a prospective juror, just cursed out loud on discovering that she's being considered for the Weinstein case. Now the judge, James Burke, reacts to that. Quote:
[Inner quote.] "Now I noticed that there was some reaction when the defendant's name was read," Burke said mildly. "I heard a gasp from my left, over here, so I have to tell you that having heard of Harvey Weinstein or even being familiar with the allegations made against him in the press or elsewhere are not by themselves disqualifying." [End inner quote.]
End quote.
So I guess I should revisit what I said about jurors being selected for ignorance and gullibility. Ignorance is not essential to qualify as a juror. Knowledge of Weinstein and the charges against him is not by itself—note that emphasis—is not by itself disqualifying for jury service in the case, Judge Burke instructs us.
You can know who Weinstein is, and you can even know the charges against him; just so long as you understand that he's an Enemy of the People, the court is fine with you.
[Permalink]
03—Vagabonds and strumpets. I'm not precisely clear how the charges against Harvey Weinstein align with things we've heard about what he's supposed to have done.
What precisely, for example, is the "criminal sex act," listed as separate from the rape and assault charges? If it's not rape and it's not sexual assault, why is it criminal?
Sure; I know that back in the dark, hateful past of forty or fifty years ago, when Americans groaned under the iron heel of puritanical heteronormative oppression, all kinds of sex acts were criminalized. But wasn't that all swept away in the glorious dawn of late-twentieth-century enlightenment?
One of the plaintiffs, name of Mimi Haleyi, accuses Weinstein of performing oral sex on her against her will. Was that the "criminal sex act"? It's not clear.
And—I'm sorry to be indelicate here, but it's germane to my argument—I'm struggling with the idea of nonconsensual cunnilingus. Weinstein's a big guy, but it seems to me some determined wriggling and leg-crossing, with some well-aimed slaps to his head, perhaps with the assist of a table lamp or some such, would have made the whole engagement highly unrewarding from Weinstein's point of view.
Similar skepticism applies to the rape charges, as I've seen them reported. Rape is certainly a real thing, but I don't see how it can be carried out between two adults without serious violence or the threat of violence. Here are some scenarios I can imagine where rape actually happened.
Scenario One: The man is holding a knife to the woman's throat, and she believes he'll use it.
Scenario Two: The man has accomplices who hold the woman down and cover her mouth to muffle screams.
Scenario Three: The man comes upon the woman in some remote location, beyond the sight and hearing of other people, and knocks her out or somehow overpowers her.
Scenario Four: The man gets the woman alone, slips her a Micky Finn, and does the deed while she's unconscious.
I'll certainly allow those as genuine rape scenarios. A man convicted on sound evidence in any of Scenarios One, Two, or Three should, in my opinion, go to the chair. Scenario Four is more debatable …
None of the charges I've seen against Weinstein look like any of those scenarios, though. None of them, to my eyes, look like anything worse than gross bad manners.
And what's with all the helpless passivity on display from the "victims" here? My dating days are decades behind me, I'll allow; but I don't remember women being such trembling, shrinking violets.
Yo, ladies: Scream, break something, throw some large object through a window. The thing he's intending to do to you involves exposing his most sensitive parts to your nails, your teeth, your feet, the shards of any dish or bottle you can break. If he doesn't have a knife to your throat, doesn't have a couple of buddies holding you down and stuffing a towel in your mouth, and the room you're in isn't scientifically soundproofed, the advantage is all yours.
Sample story from the Weinstein case. Quote:
Prosecutors allege that Weinstein met Jane Doe 2 during a business meeting at a restaurant inside a hotel. They were with a female acquaintance. After that, the three spoke in the lobby and eventually went to Weinstein's hotel suite, prosecutors allege. Jane Doe 2 said she unwittingly made it into Weinstein's hotel bathroom, and the female acquaintance shut the door behind her.
At that point, Weinstein allegedly took off his clothes and took a brief shower, the court papers allege.
"While naked he moved towards her keeping himself between her and the door and preventing her from leaving. She laughed from shock as the defendant took down her dress. He turned her around and held her in place by her breast as he masturbated until he ejaculated on the floor," wrote prosecutor Paul Thompson.
He then let her leave, the documents say. [Trapped in bathroom, held down by Weinstein: Woman's horrifying allegations laid out by prosecutors, by Richard Winton; L.A. Times, January 6 2020.]
End quote.
All my previous remarks apply. "He took a brief shower"? What, while she stood and watched? Hotel bathroom fixtures come apart with a good pull. You then have a weapon in your hands in a room rapidly flooding and a naked guy trying to protect his family jewels. She'd "unwittingly" made it into the bathroom? What, she mistook it for an elevator? And who's this "female acquaintance"? Is she charged with being an accomplice to sexual assault? Shall we hear courtroom testimony from her?
And all this is within the larger world of showbiz. I said in the last segment I am double skeptical: first from knowledge at one remove of Weinstein the person, then second from reading about a previous mass hysteria in Dorothy Rabinowitz's book.
The environment here being showbiz, you can make that triple skeptical. Flocks of pretty young women desperate for a movie part; rich old guys who can make it come true for them; what does anyone think is going to happen? Are we really now so deep into denial of our own human nature?
Showbiz is the province of vagabonds and strumpets, just as much today as in Shakespeare's time. If vagabondage and strumpetry aren't your choice of society, stay away from showbiz people. Find some other line of work.
The Harvey Weinstein case? Mass hysteria, pumped up by unscrupulous lawyers, delusional showbiz airheads, and CultMarx media ideologues. That's my verdict. Case dismissed!
[Permalink]
04—The order-liberty cycle. A listener has chidden me for saying, in my December 27th podcast, quote: "If voting made a difference, they wouldn't allow it." That was in reference to the many cases where a referendum or ballot initiative was voted one way by the people, then squashed, reversed, or gutted by judges and/or politicians.
My listener, quote:
This is the sort of slogan that we might have believed in when we were teenagers. We're a long way from being stupid teenagers now, and you should know better than to simplify the world into bumper stickers.
Here's an example. You are a great fan of the late Margaret Thatcher. (I'm not, but that's a topic for a different letter.) Thatcher undoubtedly made many changes in British domestic and foreign policy. Do you think these changes would have been made if Labour had stayed in power? I don't think so. Voting for Thatcher made a difference.
Neither of us knows how Boris Johnson will play out, but do you think his laws and policies will be the same as Jeremy Corbin's? Voting for Johnson made a difference …
If voting made no difference, why are tyrants so afraid of it? Why do dictators either eliminate or rig elections? Why do so many heroes sacrifice their lives to achieve democracy?
Being glib doesn't become you.
End quote.
Hm. I don't know; I kind of like the glib look … That itself is glib, though, so I'm sliding into an infinite regress there—whoa!
My correspondent of course has a point. Sometimes voting does make a difference. I have a point too, though: all too often it doesn't. That was the case in the examples I cited: Oregon giving driver licenses to illegal aliens in defiance of Ballot Measure 88, and the crushing of California Proposition 187 back in 1994, when Californians voted to deny welfare benefits to illegal aliens.
Those of us afflicted with Trump Disappointment Syndrome often find ourselves wondering what good our Presidential vote did in 2016. America is still inviting the world and invading the world. Would things really have been much different in a Hillary Clinton administration?
So voting doesn't make any difference, except when it does. I'd argue that the doesn'ts way outnumber the doeses, and we ought to be thinking hard what we can do to improve on that.
We, along with all the other developed democracies, have a huge administrative state managed by a vast, entrenched nomenklatura of bureaucrats, time-servers, ideologues, and political seat-warmers. That's a mighty big ship, and she doesn't turn easily.
On the general subject of political change in a democracy, there is also what I call the order-justice cycle.
It's a cliché of course that there is a tension in any society between order and liberty. You can have too much order, by stifling liberty altogether: think of North Korea. And then, you can have too much liberty, where antisocial people run wild without restraint. For a fair and happy society, you need to find the point of balance.
Bertrand Russell visited Lenin's Russia in 1920. The following year he went to warlord China. Commenting on these trips, he said: "I went to Russia, where I found too much government. Then I went to China, where I found too little."
We are not actually very good at finding that point of balance, as we see right now with all this prison reform in the air. Our rulers have made a collective decision that too many people are going to jail and too many of those we arrest are being asked to post bail. I bloviated about this last week, speculating that white race guilt is driving all that liberalization.
So the lever is getting pushed all the way over to maximum liberty, with the corresponding decline in order. That only goes on, though, until public unhappiness about the decline of order rises to some critical mass. Then, yes, democracy works its magic. We vote in a Rudy Giuliani to push the lever back towards more order.
Can't we just find the right point of balance and lock that lever in place? On the historical evidence, no we can't. Voters just aren't that active or attentive. They adjust, put up with a decaying state of affairs, until it gets to be too much for them.
Compulsory voting might help. New York City has a crazy communist mayor because hardly anyone in the city bothers to vote in mayoral elections. Turnout in the two elections de Blasio won were thirteen percent and eighteen percent. In New York, you get what you don't vote for.
So democracy, yes; but our current system has problems we should be thinking hard about … and we're not.
[Permalink]
05—Joe Biden was right! Big news of the week was the arm-wrestling bout with Iran. Again, as I said last week, there is no market here at Radio Derb for Great Game strategizing. I'd like for us to tip over the chess-board and walk away.
The whole thing just fills me with despair and disgust at the sheer colossal stupidity of American foreign policy. Trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, tens of thousands of maimed and disfigured, for what?
Doesn't anyone have to answer for it all? Doesn't anyone at least get reduced to the ranks of ordinary citizens with ordinary jobs, instead of wallowing in extravagant government pensions, corporate directorships, and six-figure speaking fees?
I guess not. They're the nomenklatura. They can do as they please. I more and more find myself thinking there are tumbrils and guillotines in our future, and not minding the thought very much.
I have a couple of sidebar points about the Iran business, though.
First sidebar point. I read with interest that there were mass casualties from a crowd stampede at the funeral for General What's-his-name, the Iranian bigshot we blew up with a drone last week. Apparently the streets of the general's home town were too narrow for the crowds to be properly managed. Quote from the New York Times:
For us Cold War babies, that brings to mind Stalin's funeral in Moscow, March 1953. Again, crowds overwhelmed the crowd control measures and many people were crushed or trampled to death. Nobody knows the numbers: estimates start at a few dozen.
So, one for the memo file: If you're in a totalitarian dictatorship when someone really important dies, stay away from the funeral procession. It'll be on TV anyway.
(If you're in a civilized country, the issue doesn't arise. I followed Winston Churchill's funeral cortege all through the streets of 1965 London without mishap. That was when Britain was a civilized country. Nowadays things might be different.)
Second sidebar point. I know, Joe Biden is a figure of fun. I enjoy laughing at the seat-warming old fool just as much as you do.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day, though, and Joe Biden has occasionally been right. I'm looking at the op-ed cosigned by Joe Biden and Leslie Gelb, a Council on Foreign Relations panjandrum, back on May 1st 2006.
That op-ed makes melancholy reading thirteen years and eight months later. Sample:
It is increasingly clear that President Bush does not have a strategy for victory in Iraq. Rather, he hopes to prevent defeat and pass the problem along to his successor. Meanwhile, the frustration of Americans is mounting so fast that Congress might end up mandating a rapid pullout, even at the risk of precipitating chaos and a civil war that becomes a regional war.
End quote.
Our frustration was mounting so fast! Thirteen years and eight months ago! That's precisely five thousand days ago this Wednesday, if my calculator has not deceived me. Five thousand days! Imagine how much more frustrated we must be now!
And: "Congress might end up mandating a rapid pullout." Congress! [Laugh.]
That's not my man point, though. My main point is a bit further down in Joe and Leslie's op-ed. After noting the ineffectual nature of Iraq's so-called "governments of national unity," Joe writes, or agrees with Gelb writing, the following, quote:
The alternative path out of this terrible trap has five elements.
The first is to establish three largely autonomous regions with a viable central government in Baghdad. The Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite regions would each be responsible for their own domestic laws, administration and internal security. ["Unity Through Autonomy in Iraq" by Joe Biden and Leslie Gelb; NY Times, May 1 2006.]
Yesssss! Partition! Iraq is a bogus country. It should be three countries. All right, that's not precisely what Joe wrote, but he and Gelb were headed in the right direction.
The rest of the foreign policy establishment was of course aghast. Iraq's borders are sacrosanct! they swooned. If only they'd felt the same way about America's.
So yes, sure, Joe's a clown. Even a clown is right once in a while, though.
[Permalink]
06—Miscellany. And now, our closing miscellany of brief items.
Imprimis: Race-denialist item of the week comes from a website called StreetsBlog, which bills itself as, quote, "Informing The Movement To Improve Walking, Biking, And Transit." Oh, you didn't know there is such a movement? Me neither; but as someone who walks a lot, bikes a bit, and rides New York City public transit, I have no objection at all to there being one.
Headline from them, January 8th, headline: NYPD Targets Blacks and Latinos for "Jaywalking" Tickets. There are scare quotes around "jaywalking."
It turns out, you see, that 89.5 percent of summonses for walking against a traffic light, or crossing mid-block, that's just short of ninety percent, went to blacks and Hispanics, who are together only 55 percent of city residents. That's flagrant racism, obviously.
And as if that isn't bad enough, 44 percent of the tickets go to people aged 18 to 25, even though that group comprises just 7 percent of the population. So New York City cops are not only racist, they're also ageist.
When will there finally be justice and equal outcomes for all? How long, O Lord, how long?
[Permalink]
Item: On the snowflake front, National Review reports that Lecturers at a college in Britain—in the journalism department, yet—have been warned that when writing, texting, or emailing to students, they should not use all capital letters. Apparently students find all-caps scary and … what's the cant word?—triggering?
The best reaction to that came from our own Steve Sailer on twitter. Tweet:
I was in an email group with a Nobel Laureate who always typed in all caps.
I suggested to him that he could try typing in all lower case because the all caps made him appear to be shouting.
He replied, [in all caps] BUT I AM SHOUTING!
End tweet.
[Permalink]
Item: Back to New York City: This Latino guy on the City Council—a body that I can tell you, from years of reading about it, has way too much time on its hands—this Latino guy Francisco Moya wants to pass a bill that will ban the use of the terms "alien," "illegal alien," or "illegal immigrant" in official municipal documents.
Wait a minute: Didn't New York do that already? Not precisely. Checking back, I see that back in September last a directive from the city's Commission on Human Rights made it illegal to refer to someone as an "illegal alien" when motivated by hate. Violations can be punished by fines of up to $250,000 per offense.
Has that ever been tested in a court of law? How would it be?
What we need is some objective way to measure the degree of hate in someone's heart when they say "illegal alien." But again, we already have one: the prejudometer, as advertised by British newspaper columnist Michael Wharton twenty years ago. Quote from his column, April 13 2001:
Inexpensive and handy for pocket or handbag, you simply point [the prejudometer] at any person (including yourself) you suspect of "racism," press the easy-to-find "action" button and read off the result in prejudons, the internationally recognised scientific unit of racial prejudice.
Plainly I'm going to need one of those for my occasional jaunts into New York City. I'd better get on Amazon looking for a reasonably-priced prejudometer—or, as I suspect it is nowadays called, hate-ometer. You'll have to excuse me …
[Permalink]
07—Signoff. That's it, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for listening and for your emails, including those that chide. A little chiding now and then keeps a writer on his toes.
For our sign-out, here's something new. We've had music, both instrumental and vocal, and we've had poetry. Here for a change is some plain spoken English.
In my December Diary I mentioned the British politician Stanley Baldwin, whose first spells as Prime Minister coincided quite closely with Calvin Coolidge's Presidency, and whose governing style was Coolidgean. I noted that unlike Silent Cal, Baldwin was not wise enough to quit while he was ahead. He was Prime Minister again in the mid-1930s, with unhappy results.
Still, Stanley Baldwin seems to me to have been a pretty good egg. Curious to hear the man's voice, I went looking for sound recordings. Here, from a CD that's been gathering dust on my bookshelves, is a bit of his last speech as Prime Minister, May 18th 1937. It touches on some of what I said earlier about order, freedom, and the point of balance.
Baldwin was addressing the Empire Rally of Youth here. And yes, that's the British Empire [sigh].
More from Radio Derb next week.
[Permalink]
[Music clip: Stanley Baldwin, Address to the Empire Rally of Youth.]
Let me end in this, the last speech I shall make before a great audience as Prime Minister of this country. Let me proclaim my faith, which is the faith of millions of all races from end to end of the British Empire. Here we have ceased to be an island, but we are still an Empire.
And what is her secret? Freedom, ordered freedom, within the law, with force in the background and not in the foreground: a society in which authority and freedom are blended in due proportion, in which state and citizen are both ends and means. It is an empire organised for peace and for the free development of the individual in and through an infinite variety of voluntary associations. It neither deifies the state nor its rulers …


vdare--2020-01-10--John Derbyshire: Joe Biden Was Right—Partition Iraq! But That Was Back In 2006

See , earlier , by Steve Sailer : The Partition Possibility , November 30 , 2003 Adapted from the latest Radio Derb , available exclusively at VDARE.com Big news of the week : the arm-wrestling bout with Iran .
Again , as I said last week , there is no market here for Great Game strategizing .
I 'd like for us to tip over the chess-board and walk away .
The whole thing just fills me with despair and disgust at the sheer colossal stupidity of American foreign policy .
Trillions of dollars , thousands of lives , tens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for what ?
Does n't anyone have to answer for it all ?
Does n't anyone at least get reduced to the ranks of ordinary citizens with ordinary jobs , instead of wallowing in extravagant government pensions , corporate directorships , and six-figure speaking fees ?
I guess not .
They 're the nomenklatura .
They can do as they please .
I more and more find myself thinking there are tumbrils and guillotines in our future , and not minding the thought very much .
I have a couple of sidebar points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • First sidebar point .
I read with interest that there were mass casualties from a crowd stampede at the funeral for General What's-his-name , the Iranian bigshot we blew up with a drone last week .
Apparently the streets of the general 's home town were too narrow for the crowds to be properly managed .
Quote from the New York Times : For us Cold War babies , that brings to mind Stalin 's funeral in Moscow , March 1953 .
Again , crowds overwhelmed the crowd control measures and many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
[ How Stalin ’ s demise resulted in the deaths of dozens of Soviet citizens , by Oleg Yegorov , Russia Beyond , March 15 , 2019 ] Nobody knows the numbers : estimates start at a few dozen .
So , one for the memo file : If you 're in a totalitarian dictatorship when someone really important dies , stay away from the funeral procession .
It 'll be on TV anyway .
• Second sidebar point .
I know , Joe Biden is a figure of fun .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just as much as you do .
Stopped clocks are right twice a day , though , and Joe Biden has occasionally been right .
I 'm looking at the op-ed cosigned by Joe Biden and the late Leslie Gelb , a Council on Foreign Relations panjandrum , back on May 1st , 2006 .
It makes melancholy reading thirteen years and eight months later : Our frustration was mounting so fast !
Thirteen years and eight months ago !
That 's precisely five thousand days ago this Wednesday , if my calculator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days !
Imagine how much more frustrated we must be now !
And : `` Congress might end up mandating a rapid pullout . ''
Congress !
[ Laugh . ]
That 's not my main point , though .
My main point is a bit further down in Joe and Leslie 's op-ed .
After noting the ineffectual nature of Iraq 's so-called `` governments of national unity , '' Joe writes , or agrees with Gelb writing , the following : Iraq is a bogus country .
It should be three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not precisely what Joe wrote , but he and Gelb were headed in the right direction .
Below , another map of the ( rough ) divisions that might be negotiated , via an Iraqi blogger : Partition of Iraq is the Best Solution for Iraq , Semnak Lairam , February 7 , 2018 But the rest of the foreign policy Establishment was of course aghast .
Iraq 's borders are sacrosanct !
they swooned .
If only they 'd felt the same way about America 's .
So yes , sure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a clown is right once in a while .
email him ] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets .
( This no longer includes National Review , whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him . )
He is the author of We Are Doomed : Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books .
He has had two books published by VDARE.com com : FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT ( also available in Kindle ) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II : ESSAYS 2013 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ podcasting at Radio Derb , now available at VDARE.com for no charge .
His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com .
Readers who wish to donate ( tax deductible ) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire 's writings at VDARE.com can do so here .

See, earlier, by Steve Sailer: The Partition Possibility, November 30, 2003
Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively at VDARE.com
Big news of the week: the arm-wrestling bout with Iran. Again, as I said last week, there is no market here for Great Game strategizing. I'd like for us to tip over the chess-board and walk away.
The whole thing just fills me with despair and disgust at the sheer colossal stupidity of American foreign policy. Trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, tens of thousands of maimed and disfigured, for what?
Doesn't anyone have to answer for it all? Doesn't anyone at least get reduced to the ranks of ordinary citizens with ordinary jobs, instead of wallowing in extravagant government pensions, corporate directorships, and six-figure speaking fees?
I guess not. They're the nomenklatura. They can do as they please. I more and more find myself thinking there are tumbrils and guillotines in our future, and not minding the thought very much.
I have a couple of sidebar points about the Iran business, though.
First sidebar point. I read with interest that there were mass casualties from a crowd stampede at the funeral for General What's-his-name, the Iranian bigshot we blew up with a drone last week. Apparently the streets of the general's home town were too narrow for the crowds to be properly managed.
Quote from the New York Times:
The head of Iran's emergency medical services said 56 people had died and 213 were injured … as millions of people flooded the streets of Kerman to witness the [funeral] procession. [Iran Fires on U.S. Forces at 2 Bases in Iraq, Calling It 'Fierce Revenge,' by Alissa J. Rubin et al.; January 7, 2020]
For us Cold War babies, that brings to mind Stalin's funeral in Moscow, March 1953. Again, crowds overwhelmed the crowd control measures and many people were crushed or trampled to death. [How Stalin’s demise resulted in the deaths of dozens of Soviet citizens, by Oleg Yegorov, Russia Beyond, March 15, 2019] Nobody knows the numbers: Estimates start at a few dozen.
So, one for the memo file: If you're in a totalitarian dictatorship when someone really important dies, stay away from the funeral procession. It'll be on TV anyway.
(If you're in a civilized country, the issue doesn't arise. I followed Winston Churchill's funeral cortege all through the streets of 1965 London without mishap. But that was when Britain was a civilized country. Nowadays things might be different.)
Second sidebar point. I know, Joe Biden is a figure of fun. I enjoy laughing at the seat-warming old fool just as much as you do.
Stopped clocks are right twice a day, though, and Joe Biden has occasionally been right. I'm looking at the op-ed cosigned by Joe Biden and the late Leslie Gelb, a Council on Foreign Relations panjandrum, back on May 1st, 2006. It makes melancholy reading thirteen years and eight months later:
It is increasingly clear that President Bush does not have a strategy for victory in Iraq. Rather, he hopes to prevent defeat and pass the problem along to his successor. Meanwhile, the frustration of Americans is mounting so fast that Congress might end up mandating a rapid pullout, even at the risk of precipitating chaos and a civil war that becomes a regional war.
Our frustration was mounting so fast! Thirteen years and eight months ago! That's precisely five thousand days ago this Wednesday, if my calculator has not deceived me. Five thousand days! Imagine how much more frustrated we must be now!
And: "Congress might end up mandating a rapid pullout." Congress! [Laugh.]
That's not my main point, though. My main point is a bit further down in Joe and Leslie's op-ed.
After noting the ineffectual nature of Iraq's so-called "governments of national unity," Joe writes, or agrees with Gelb writing, the following:
The alternative path out of this terrible trap has five elements. The first is to establish three largely autonomous regions with a viable central government in Baghdad. The Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite regions [See map at right, via the WSJ] would each be responsible for their own domestic laws, administration and internal security. [Unity Through Autonomy in Iraq, by Joe Biden and Leslie Gelb; NY Times, May 1, 2006]
Yesssss! Partition!
Iraq is a bogus country. It should be three countries. All right, that's not precisely what Joe wrote, but he and Gelb were headed in the right direction.
Below, another map of the (rough) divisions that might be negotiated, via an Iraqi blogger:
Partition of Iraq is the Best Solution for Iraq, Semnak Lairam, February 7, 2018
Biden's idea echoes perennial VDARE.com themes: Human differences matter! Good fences make good neighbors!
But the rest of the foreign policy Establishment was of course aghast. Iraq's borders are sacrosanct! they swooned.
If only they'd felt the same way about America's.
So yes, sure, Joe's a clown. But even a clown is right once in a while.
John Derbyshire [ email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him.) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He has had two books published by VDARE.com com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II: ESSAYS 2013.
For years he’s been podcasting at Radio Derb, now available at VDARE.com for no charge. His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.
Readers who wish to donate (tax deductible) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire's writings at VDARE.com can do so here.


vdare--2020-01-10--Black Lives Matter And Murder: The Great Awokening ~ the Great Entombment

During the rise of Black Lives Matter , the total number of murder victims in the U.S. increased 24.8 % from 2014 to 2016 .
This is not widely known , so I ’ m putting the data and links in one convenient place .
Here ’ s a screenshot of the FBI ’ s latest trend table of the number of murder victims : With criminal justice “ reform ” much in the news , it ’ s important to point out a fact that the prestige press has gone out of its way to not bring to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ returns on this Establishment hobbyhorse have been disastrous : after a number of years of stability or decline , the total number of murder victims in the U.S. , according to FBI statistics , suddenly shot up 24.8 % from 2014 ( the Year of Ferguson and Black Lives Matters ) to 2016 ( Obama ’ s last stand ) : The low point in recent years was 2013 , when only 12,253 people were murdered .
2014 was almost as peaceful , with only 12,278 murders .
But then the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2015 and another 11.2 % in 2016 for a total increase of 24.8 % : If the number of homicides had stayed stable at 2014 ’ s 12,278 , then by the end of 2018 , there would have been 9,304 fewer murders since January 1 , 2015 .
So by early 2020 , the total number of incremental murders of the Great Awokening is now up over 10,000 .
If , say , half the incremental victims are black , then that number of extra deaths is more than all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course , incremental murders have been greatest where Black Lives Matter won its greatest political triumphs , such as in Baltimore , which , although it only represents 0.2 % of the country ’ s population , accounted for 5.0 % of America ’ s incremental murders since 2015 , the year of Baltimore ’ s Freddy Gray riots on April 25 , through the end of 2018 .
From MistyBeach.com : One complication of counting the number of murder victims is that their numbers tend to rise for a few years , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ graves and violence victims in comas die .

During the rise of Black Lives Matter, the total number of murder victims in the U.S. increased 24.8% from 2014 to 2016. This is not widely known, so I’m putting the data and links in one convenient place.
Here’s a screenshot of the FBI’s latest trend table of the number of murder victims:
With criminal justice “reform” much in the news, it’s important to point out a fact that the prestige press has gone out of its way to not bring to the attention of readers: That the early returns on this Establishment hobbyhorse have been disastrous: after a number of years of stability or decline, the total number of murder victims in the U.S., according to FBI statistics, suddenly shot up 24.8% from 2014 (the Year of Ferguson and Black Lives Matters) to 2016 (Obama’s last stand):
The low point in recent years was 2013, when only 12,253 people were murdered. 2014 was almost as peaceful, with only 12,278 murders. But then the number of murder victims went up by 12.2% in 2015 and another 11.2% in 2016 for a total increase of 24.8%:
Murder Victims: FBI UCR Bush B B O O O O O BLM 8/14 O O T T 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 15087 14196 14224 13752 13164 12795 12888 12253 12278 13780 15318 15195 14123 Y to Y Chg -5.9% 0.2% -3.3% -4.3% -2.8% 0.7% -4.9% 0.2% 12.2% 11.2% -0.8% -7.1% Diff vs. 2014 22.9% 15.6% 15.8% 12.0% 7.2% 4.2% 5.0% -0.2% 0.0% 12.2% 24.8% 23.8% 15.0% Diff vs. 2014 2,809 1,918 1,946 1,474 886 517 610 -25 0 1,502 3,040 2,917 1,845 Cumulative incremental murders since 2014 0 1,502 4,542 7,459 9,304
If the number of homicides had stayed stable at 2014’s 12,278, then by the end of 2018, there would have been 9,304 fewer murders since January 1, 2015. So by early 2020, the total number of incremental murders of the Great Awokening is now up over 10,000.
If, say, half the incremental victims are black, then that number of extra deaths is more than all the lynchings in American history.
And of course, incremental murders have been greatest where Black Lives Matter won its greatest political triumphs, such as in Baltimore, which, although it only represents 0.2% of the country’s population, accounted for 5.0% of America’s incremental murders since 2015, the year of Baltimore’s Freddy Gray riots on April 25, through the end of 2018. From MistyBeach.com:
One complication of counting the number of murder victims is that their numbers tend to rise for a few years, as dead bodies are discovered in shallow graves and violence victims in comas die.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-01-10--Rep. Omar Inadvertently Proves The Case For Banning "Refugees"

In September 2019 , President Donald Trump issued an executive order that allows states and localities to opt out of accepting refugees .
In resettling refugees into American communities , it is the policy of the United States to cooperate and consult with State and local governments , to consider the preferences of State governments , and to provide a pathway for refugees to become self-sufficient .
These policies support each other ...
The Federal Government consults with State and local governments not only to identify the best environments for refugees , but also to be respectful of those communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refugee resettlement .
[ Executive Order on Enhancing State and Local Involvement in Refugee Resettlement , The White House , September 26 , 2019 ] While many Republican governors are actually requesting refugees , no doubt at the behest of their donors hungry for cheap labor , some are taking advantage of these new powers .
The state of Texas became the first to reject refugees .
The Texas governor said that his state will reject the resettling of new refugees , making Texas the first state to do so following a Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do so .
Gov .
Greg Abbott wrote in the letter , dated Friday , that Texas “ can not consent to initial refugee resettlement ” for fiscal year 2020 .
In the letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo , Abbott wrote that since fiscal year 2010 “ more refugees have been received in Texas than in any other state.
” “ In addition to accepting refugees all these years , Texas has been left by Congress to deal with disproportionate migration issues resulting from a broken federal immigration system , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Texas and non-profit organizations had a “ responsibility to dedicate available resources to those who are already here , including refugees , migrants , and the homeless indeed , all Texans.
” [ Texas governor to reject new refugee resettlement following Trump order , by Daniella Silva , NBC News , January 10 , 2019 ] Some localities also want to defend their communities , including one Minnesota country .
Of course , this does n't make Ilhan Omar very happy .
After an executive order by President Trump made it possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night opted to ban the resettlement of refugees within its boundaries , becoming the first in the state and the second in the nation to do so .
The vote at a crowded public meeting in Beltrami County , a sparsely inhabited area surrounding Red Lake , drew condemnation from many Minnesota Democrats , including U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar .
The move was viewed by many as a reaction to spiking crime in the state since large numbers of Somali refugees began arriving , according to reports .
But supporters say it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as facilitated by the president ... “ Over 20 years ago , the state of Minnesota welcomed my family with open arms .
I never would ’ ve had the opportunities that led me to Congress had I been rejected , ” Omar wrote .
“ What Beltrami County is doing is denying refugees a chance at a better life.
” [ Omar sounds off after Minnesota county bans refugee resettlement – aided by Trump executive order , by Danielle Wallace , Fox News , January 10 , 2019 ] Let us pause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Omar making the point she thinks she 's making ?
Her statement is entirely self-centered .
She simply assumes that the United States exists to provide `` refugees '' with a `` better life '' and that any restrictions are entirely illegitimate .
Of course , if sufficient numbers of `` refugees '' arrive in Beltrami County , it will no different than the Third World countries these people come from .
It 's not just Beltrami County or Minnesota dealing with Somali crime .
It 's the entire country , case after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Somali War Criminals In The News — And In America • White Man Beaten To Death By Somali Mob In Lewiston , Maine And many more .
Yet let 's return to Rep. Omar .
She says she was welcomed with `` open arms . ''
Has she returned the favor ?
Clearly not .
Instead , she seems to harbor fierce resentment and even hatred for the Historic American Nation .
She thinks our country was founded on `` genocide , '' demands further government restrictions on whites , and belittled the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the supposed `` backlash '' against her co-religionists .
The irony of course is that the September 11 attacks dramatically strengthened Islam in American culture , rendering it beyond criticism .
Instead of stopping mass immigration , our rulers gave us more of it and we will undoubtedly have more elected officials like Rep. Omar in the future .
Rep. Omar inadvertently provides a strong case for ending refugee resettlement altogether .
We have already imported a resentful and permanent underclass that clearly hates our country , despite the fact that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and worshipful treatment by the Main Stream Media .
Do we really need more ?
There is much ruin in a nation , but we ca n't handle many more people like Rep. Omar .

In September 2019, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that allows states and localities to opt out of accepting refugees.
In resettling refugees into American communities, it is the policy of the United States to cooperate and consult with State and local governments, to consider the preferences of State governments, and to provide a pathway for refugees to become self-sufficient. These policies support each other... The Federal Government consults with State and local governments not only to identify the best environments for refugees, but also to be respectful of those communities that may not be able to accommodate refugee resettlement. [Executive Order on Enhancing State and Local Involvement in Refugee Resettlement, The White House, September 26, 2019]
While many Republican governors are actually requesting refugees, no doubt at the behest of their donors hungry for cheap labor, some are taking advantage of these new powers. The state of Texas became the first to reject refugees.
The Texas governor said that his state will reject the resettling of new refugees, making Texas the first state to do so following a Trump administration order granting local governments the authority to do so. Gov. Greg Abbott wrote in the letter, dated Friday, that Texas “cannot consent to initial refugee resettlement” for fiscal year 2020. In the letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Abbott wrote that since fiscal year 2010 “more refugees have been received in Texas than in any other state.” “In addition to accepting refugees all these years, Texas has been left by Congress to deal with disproportionate migration issues resulting from a broken federal immigration system,” he wrote. The governor wrote that Texas and non-profit organizations had a “responsibility to dedicate available resources to those who are already here, including refugees, migrants, and the homeless indeed, all Texans.” [Texas governor to reject new refugee resettlement following Trump order, by Daniella Silva, NBC News, January 10, 2019]
Some localities also want to defend their communities, including one Minnesota country. Of course, this doesn't make Ilhan Omar very happy.
After an executive order by President Trump made it possible, a northern Minnesota county on Tuesday night opted to ban the resettlement of refugees within its boundaries, becoming the first in the state and the second in the nation to do so. The vote at a crowded public meeting in Beltrami County, a sparsely inhabited area surrounding Red Lake, drew condemnation from many Minnesota Democrats, including U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar. The move was viewed by many as a reaction to spiking crime in the state since large numbers of Somali refugees began arriving, according to reports. But supporters say it was simply an exercise of their rights, as facilitated by the president... “Over 20 years ago, the state of Minnesota welcomed my family with open arms. I never would’ve had the opportunities that led me to Congress had I been rejected,” Omar wrote. “What Beltrami County is doing is denying refugees a chance at a better life.” [Omar sounds off after Minnesota county bans refugee resettlement – aided by Trump executive order, by Danielle Wallace, Fox News, January 10, 2019]
Let us pause here for a moment. Is Rep. Omar making the point she thinks she's making? Her statement is entirely self-centered. She simply assumes that the United States exists to provide "refugees" with a "better life" and that any restrictions are entirely illegitimate. Of course, if sufficient numbers of "refugees" arrive in Beltrami County, it will no different than the Third World countries these people come from.
It's not just Beltrami County or Minnesota dealing with Somali crime. It's the entire country, case after case, victim after victim.
And many more.
Yet let's return to Rep. Omar. She says she was welcomed with "open arms." Has she returned the favor?
Clearly not. Instead, she seems to harbor fierce resentment and even hatred for the Historic American Nation. She thinks our country was founded on "genocide," demands further government restrictions on whites, and belittled the September 11 terrorist attacks, instead focusing on the supposed "backlash" against her co-religionists.
The irony of course is that the September 11 attacks dramatically strengthened Islam in American culture, rendering it beyond criticism. Instead of stopping mass immigration, our rulers gave us more of it and we will undoubtedly have more elected officials like Rep. Omar in the future.
Rep. Omar inadvertently provides a strong case for ending refugee resettlement altogether. We have already imported a resentful and permanent underclass that clearly hates our country, despite the fact that they enjoy racial preferences in jobs and education and worshipful treatment by the Main Stream Media. Do we really need more? There is much ruin in a nation, but we can't handle many more people like Rep. Omar.


vdare--2020-01-10--Instapundit On Peter Brimelow's $5M Lawsuit Against The NYT—"I Would Have Added A Zero To The Claim"

Instapundit ( law professor Glenn Reynolds ) on Peter Brimelow 's five million dollar lawsuit against the New York Times : The piece he 's linking to , by PJMedia 's Tyler O'Neil , shows that the author has actually read the PDF of our complaint .
According to the lawsuit , the SPLC branded Brimelow a `` white nationalist '' in an attempt to stifle debate on immigration and because it wished to vilify his views that race may be biologically connected to intelligence .
Yet The New York Times has itself `` bravely pushed the boundaries of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states , citing articles published between July 2001 and March 2003 which covered scientific developments supposedly linking race to genetics .
Nicholas Wade wrote those articles , and the lawsuit recounts that the SPLC attacked him `` for writing about the science of race differences '' in May 2014 .
`` Nevertheless , Defendant knows that it itself is not a purveyor of hate or white nationalism because it has published articles on the science of racial differences , '' Brimelow argues .
The lawsuit quoted a letter the VDARE editor sent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the article attacking him .
`` Mr. Brimelow is not a ‘ white nationalist ’ and , specifically , does not refer to himself as such , '' the letter stated .
`` To the contrary , he has repeatedly said that he is a ‘ civic nationalist.
’ For example , in a February 23 , 2018 interview with Slate ’ s Osita Nwanevu , Mr. Brimelow stated as follows : ‘ Personally , I would regard myself as a civic nationalist.
’ '' “ The fact that VDARE has published some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from those who aim to defend the interests of whites does not mean that Mr. Brimelow is an ‘ open white nationalist , ’ any more than the New York Times ’ s decision to publish op-eds by avowed socialists makes it ‘ openly socialist , ' '' his lawyer argued .
The lawsuit also quotes The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage , which states , `` Fairness and impartiality ... should be the hallmark of all news articles and news analyses that appear in the Times .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accused , criticized or otherwise cast in a bad light have an opportunity to speak in their own defense ...
Thus it is imperative that the reporter make every effort to reach the accused ...
If it is not possible to do so , the article should say that the effort was made and explain why it did not succeed . ''
The paper also claims a high standard for corrections : `` Because its voice is loud and far-reaching , The Times recognizes an ethical responsibility to correct all its factual errors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of names ) , promptly and in a prominent reserved space in the paper ...
Whether an error occurs in a print article , a digital graphic , a video , a tweet or a news alert , readers should expect us to correct it .
There is no five-second rule .
It does not matter if it was online for seconds or minutes or hours . ''

Earlier: Brimelow Lawsuit Against NYT Makes POLITICO—And Drudge!
Instapundit (law professor Glenn Reynolds) on Peter Brimelow's five million dollar lawsuit against the New York Times:
The piece he's linking to, by PJMedia's Tyler O'Neil, shows that the author has actually read the PDF of our complaint.
O'Neil writes
According to the lawsuit, the SPLC branded Brimelow a "white nationalist" in an attempt to stifle debate on immigration and because it wished to vilify his views that race may be biologically connected to intelligence. Yet The New York Times has itself "bravely pushed the boundaries of the taboos on race," the lawsuit states, citing articles published between July 2001 and March 2003 which covered scientific developments supposedly linking race to genetics.
Nicholas Wade wrote those articles, and the lawsuit recounts that the SPLC attacked him "for writing about the science of race differences" in May 2014.
"Nevertheless, Defendant knows that it itself is not a purveyor of hate or white nationalism because it has published articles on the science of racial differences," Brimelow argues.
The lawsuit quoted a letter the VDARE editor sent to the paper two day after it published the article attacking him.
"Mr. Brimelow is not a ‘white nationalist’ and, specifically, does not refer to himself as such," the letter stated. "To the contrary, he has repeatedly said that he is a ‘civic nationalist.’ For example, in a February 23, 2018 interview with Slate’s Osita Nwanevu, Mr. Brimelow stated as follows: ‘Personally, I would regard myself as a civic nationalist.’"
“The fact that VDARE has published some critiques of America’s immigration policies from those who aim to defend the interests of whites does not mean that Mr. Brimelow is an ‘open white nationalist,’ any more than the New York Times’s decision to publish op-eds by avowed socialists makes it ‘openly socialist,'" his lawyer argued.
The lawsuit also quotes The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage, which states, "Fairness and impartiality... should be the hallmark of all news articles and news analyses that appear in the Times. It is of paramount importance that people or organizations accused, criticized or otherwise cast in a bad light have an opportunity to speak in their own defense... Thus it is imperative that the reporter make every effort to reach the accused ... If it is not possible to do so, the article should say that the effort was made and explain why it did not succeed."
The paper also claims a high standard for corrections: "Because its voice is loud and far-reaching, The Times recognizes an ethical responsibility to correct all its factual errors, large and small (even misspellings of names), promptly and in a prominent reserved space in the paper... Whether an error occurs in a print article, a digital graphic, a video, a tweet or a news alert, readers should expect us to correct it. There is no five-second rule. It does not matter if it was online for seconds or minutes or hours."


vdare--2020-01-10--White Democrat In Maryland Seeks To Weaponize Diversity And Force Low-Income Housing On Safe White S

White Democrat In Maryland Seeks To Weaponize Diversity And Force Low-Income Housing On Safe White Suburban Neighborhoods

Previously from Paul Kersey : Non-White Democrats in Virginia Seek to Outlaw White Flight and Creation of White Suburbs It ’ s time to admit the reality of life in 2020 America : Democrats/liberals view non-whites as weapons to destroy social capital in homogenous white communities .
Weaponizing diversity is the ultimate way to eliminate white privilege , right ?
A Maryland lawmaker is pushing a bill that would deliberately target more “ affluent ” suburban neighborhoods and force more low-income , high-density housing into those areas in the name of equality , according to The Daily Caller .
House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ Pictured right ] outlined his plans for a “ Homes for All ” law aimed at “ legalizing the construction of modest homes in neighborhoods close to affluent schools , reliable transit , and good jobs.
” Vaughn further claimed , without evidence , that “ local governments have weaponized zoning codes to block people of color and the working class from high-opportunity neighborhoods.
” This plan operates on the unconfirmed , and most likely false , premise that it is the neighborhood or location that leads to success , instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
CityLab staff writer Tanvi Misra further expanded on this , saying that the success of these neighborhoods is less about the location and more about the fact that “ the kids who grow up there are very likely to have a father figure.
” This attempt in Maryland is the latest in a series of efforts by Democratic lawmakers to impose low-income housing on affluent neighborhoods , as previously reported .
Some have even gone so far as to call such neighborhoods “ racist ” and not environmentally-friendly .
In a society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ association is but a pipe-dream .
Our elite , and those elected to govern and dictate our lives , utilize diversity and multiculturalism ( non-white legal immigration/refugees ) as a weapon to bludgeon what ’ s left of the Historic America Nation .
It doesn ’ t matter the state , but the same anti-white animus drives the motivations of elected Democrats to try and bludgeon white conservatives with the very diversity they flee via seeking refuge in the suburbs of formerly thriving ( now heavily non-white ) urban areas .
The restoration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the USA overnight ( which is why the NAACP spent 30+ years waging legal war on them , culminating in the Shelley vs. Kraemer decision in 1948 ) , but this would require individual white people to admit they have collective interests worth fighting for and defending .
We once did this , in a nation long forgotten : it was called the United States of America .

Previously from Paul Kersey: Non-White Democrats in Virginia Seek to Outlaw White Flight and Creation of White Suburbs
It’s time to admit the reality of life in 2020 America: Democrats/liberals view non-whites as weapons to destroy social capital in homogenous white communities. Weaponizing diversity is the ultimate way to eliminate white privilege, right?
Maryland Lawmaker Seeks to Force Low-Income Housing into Suburban Neighborhoods, American Greatness, January 9, 2020 A Maryland lawmaker is pushing a bill that would deliberately target more “affluent” suburban neighborhoods and force more low-income, high-density housing into those areas in the name of equality, according to The Daily Caller. House Delegate Vaughn Stewart (D-Md.) [pictured right] outlined his plans for a “Homes for All” law aimed at “legalizing the construction of modest homes in neighborhoods close to affluent schools, reliable transit, and good jobs.” Vaughn further claimed, without evidence, that “local governments have weaponized zoning codes to block people of color and the working class from high-opportunity neighborhoods.” This plan operates on the unconfirmed, and most likely false, premise that it is the neighborhood or location that leads to success, instead of other key factors such as family stability. CityLab staff writer Tanvi Misra further expanded on this, saying that the success of these neighborhoods is less about the location and more about the fact that “the kids who grow up there are very likely to have a father figure.” This attempt in Maryland is the latest in a series of efforts by Democratic lawmakers to impose low-income housing on affluent neighborhoods, as previously reported. Some have even gone so far as to call such neighborhoods “racist” and not environmentally friendly.
In a society governed by extreme egalitarianism, freedom of association is but a pipe-dream. Our elite, and those elected to govern and dictate our lives, utilize diversity and multiculturalism (non-white legal immigration/refugees) as a weapon to bludgeon what’s left of the Historic America Nation.
It doesn’t matter the state, but the same anti-white animus drives the motivations of elected Democrats to try and bludgeon white conservatives with the very diversity they flee via seeking refuge in the suburbs of formerly thriving (now heavily non-white) urban areas.
The restoration of restrictive covenants would bring back sanity to the USA overnight (which is why the NAACP spent 30+ years waging legal war on them, culminating in the Shelley vs. Kraemer decision in 1948), but this would require individual white people to admit they have collective interests worth fighting for and defending. We once did this, in a nation long forgotten: It was called the United States of America.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-01-11--Rhea W Boyd In LANCET "Despair Doesn't Kill, Defending Whiteness Does"

For some reason , this lengthy book review fails to mention Emmett Till was also killed by whiteness .
Capitalizing “ Black ” but not capitalizing “ white ” is a dead giveaway of racist animus in a writer .
It ’ s like the OK sign is in the minds of ADL Hate Trackers , except it is 99 % accurate .
Yet , as the present historical moment observes a rise in white deaths , the connections between white racial terror and premature death appear lost in public and academic discourse .
In Dying of Whiteness , Jonathan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probing how the armed defence of whiteness harms and sometimes kills white people too .
Situating his analysis within the political landscapes of Missouri , Tennessee , and Kansas , Metzl explores how white Americans arm themselves with guns or votes , and attempt to individually secure the benefits of whiteness , shaping in the process the population health outcomes of everyone living in the wake of their political decisions—including other white people .
From expansive gun legislation to broad divestment in government programmes , Metzl characterises white liberties that endanger white lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of whiteness ” .
… Framed against the backdrop of the 2016 US election , Metzl tries to fill this void by naming a common aetiology threatening the health of white Americans .
Something he calls , “ racial resentment ” .
As he argues , “ resentment against changing demographics ” and groups like “ immigrants or minorities ” , “ shapes [ white ] attitudes towards various acts of legislation ” , particularly during times of economic insecurity .
In other words , to “ maintain an imagined place atop a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harbour “ racial resentment ” adopt political orientations and voting patterns largely based on if , and how , those choices seem to limit the freedoms or resources available to non-white and/or Black people .
Yet they also do so , even when those decisions threaten their own wellbeing or that of other white people .
This , in Metzl ’ s estimation , is how whiteness harms population health .
But Metzl just doesn ’ t hate white people enough for Dr. Boyd ’ s taste : But foregrounding “ resentment ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behaviours has consequences .
First , it erases white agency through emotional euphemism .
Second , it minimises how white racism , especially when enacted through political choices , can simultaneously be self-interested and self-destructive .
At times , Metzl artfully articulates and historicises the racist origins of white interest in firearm fanaticism and “ small government ” politics .
At others , he turns to “ racial anxieties ” , racially charged “ fears ” , or “ racial resentment ” to describe white people ’ s political investment in white racial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to advance structural racism , and the violence those choices engender at a population level , get misinterpreted as primarily emotionally driven or disconnected from material reward .
This tendency , to mis-attribute white self-destruction and violence to psychological states or to obscure the impacts of defending whiteness through emotional euphemisms , is a common practice .
For example , the disaggregated drivers of all-cause white mortality ( conditions such as suicide , chronic liver disease , and drug and alcohol poisoning ) have been described as “ diseases of despair ” rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wield firearms ) and access ( to prescription opiates ) .
Media responses to white perpetrators of mass shootings have cited abstract “ mental illness ” , labelled shooters as “ lone wolves ” , and treated their violence as idiosyncratic rather than the deadly confluence of white racial terrorism , patriarchy , and liberalised access to guns .
Even research examining the relation between whiteness and health suggests psychological “ distress ” contributes to how whiteness impairs health .
And increasingly , intellectuals rapt with the concept of “ white fragility ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experience when confronted with their racism , rather than the legacy of death in whiteness ’ s wake .
To assert that resentment , despair , or any emotion that arises from being “ left behind ” accounts for white Americans ’ self-destructive actions , violent politics , or declining population health misses two counterpoints .
Academic Whiteness Studies is extremely intellectual , so unless you are as highbrow as Rhea Boyd MD , you probably won ’ t understand her complex worldview , which is : Excuse me , my apologies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As all of us Woke Folk now know , Blacks deserve capitalization but whites do not .
Yet scholars , the media , and the public seem intent on viewing white voter patterns post-2016 and rising white deaths post-2010 as born of recessions , resentment , and racial divides .
This myopathy overlooks the evolving ways white Americans continue to mobilise to maintain or extend the exclusive advantages whiteness offers those who can become white , even as those advantages place them in increasing proximity to death .
When confronted with self-inflicted or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the media , and the public are evading the logical conclusion—one Metzl both illuminates and eschews—despair isn ’ t killing white America , the armed defence of whiteness is .
To be clear , it is not that amid the armed defence of whiteness some people have inadvertently or indirectly died .
Rather , death is the inevitable consequence of the full realisation of structural racism and the exclusive rights and resources it offers those who can become white .
This type of death is perhaps more easily recognised when it is sudden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Cynthia , Carole , Carol Denise , Johnny , and Virgil .
But it can also be “ slow and [ nearly ] invisible ” , as it is among white Americans who will deteriorate from chronic liver disease or substance use .
Ultimately , white racial terror can strike by blunt force or decaying infrastructure , through frank abuse or frank neglect .
It can kill babies or mothers , immigrants or Indigenous peoples .
But within a white racial ordering of humans , rights and resources , non-white and/or Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white deaths appear to be the aberration .
But they evidence the rule , not the exception .
For humans to use whiteness to manufacture access and privilege , they must engineer scarcity and loss .
Scarcity is a social construct .
Without People of Whiteness engineering scarcity , there ’ s be plenty of cargo for everybody .
This entanglement between access and scarcity , privilege and loss , means white people ’ s unearned advantages have always been tethered to a legacy of untold deaths .
This is not the result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ structural one .
In Dying of Whiteness , Metzl intricately outlines this structural framework but too often anchors it to an emotional foundation his analysis both critiques and depends on .
This is perhaps why his conclusion is to “ Promote more healthy and self-reflective frameworks…of structural whiteness ” when the only solution is to eliminate whiteness all together .
Because the consequences of structural whiteness are fatal and as new populations seek its exclusive advantages , the associated harms continue to unfold .
For example , as some Asian American students challenge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eliminating opportunities for higher education they also risk decreasing life expectancy for affected non-white and/or Black students too .
And as Hispanic Americans increasingly select white on the census , it reveals pressures to assimilate that may endanger their population health as well .
… The solution to defending whiteness is not self-reflection .
It is not a difficult conversation .
And it is not centring white emotions , however distressing they may be .
The solution is those who can become white must summon the courage to unbecome white and then to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way of life , the philosophy [ producing ] murderers ” .
Similarly , I ’ m about to say something you might not be ready to hear .
But I ’ m going to say it anyways .
Starvation wasn ’ t killing kulak Ukrainians .
The obstinate defense of structural kulakness was .
In summary , it ’ s time for more People of Whiteness to take seriously the acronymized message of Diversity Inclusion Equity before the Woke are forced to move on to the Inclusion Equity Diversity phase of @ @ @

From Lancet, the famous British medical journal, a book review:
For some reason, this lengthy book review fails to mention Emmett Till was also killed by whiteness.
Comprehending the deaths of these Black children—killed by white men and boys in the American South in 1963—requires confronting the white racial terror that threatened Black communities and unearthing the legacy of death that courses alongside even the youngest Black lives.
Capitalizing “Black” but not capitalizing “white” is a dead giveaway of racist animus in a writer. It’s like the OK sign is, in the minds of ADL Hate Trackers, except it is 99% accurate.
Yet, as the present historical moment observes a rise in white deaths, the connections between white racial terror and premature death appear lost in public and academic discourse. In Dying of Whiteness, Jonathan Metzl attempts to trace these connections by probing how the armed defence of whiteness harms and sometimes kills white people too. Situating his analysis within the political landscapes of Missouri, Tennessee, and Kansas, Metzl explores how white Americans arm themselves with guns or votes, and attempt to individually secure the benefits of whiteness, shaping in the process the population health outcomes of everyone living in the wake of their political decisions—including other white people. From expansive gun legislation to broad divestment in government programmes, Metzl characterises white liberties that endanger white lives or imperil white futures as “dying of whiteness”. … Framed against the backdrop of the 2016 US election, Metzl tries to fill this void by naming a common aetiology threatening the health of white Americans. Something he calls, “racial resentment”. As he argues, “resentment against changing demographics” and groups like “immigrants or minorities”, “shapes [white] attitudes towards various acts of legislation”, particularly during times of economic insecurity. In other words, to “maintain an imagined place atop a racial hierarchy”, white Americans who harbour “racial resentment” adopt political orientations and voting patterns largely based on if, and how, those choices seem to limit the freedoms or resources available to non-white and/or Black people. Yet they also do so, even when those decisions threaten their own wellbeing or that of other white people. This, in Metzl’s estimation, is how whiteness harms population health.
But Metzl just doesn’t hate white people enough for Dr. Boyd’s taste:
But foregrounding “resentment” as the source of self-destructive white political behaviours has consequences. First, it erases white agency through emotional euphemism. Second, it minimises how white racism, especially when enacted through political choices, can simultaneously be self-interested and self-destructive. At times, Metzl artfully articulates and historicises the racist origins of white interest in firearm fanaticism and “small government” politics. At others, he turns to “racial anxieties”, racially charged “fears”, or “racial resentment” to describe white people’s political investment in white racial dominance. The effect is white choices to advance structural racism, and the violence those choices engender at a population level, get misinterpreted as primarily emotionally driven or disconnected from material reward. This tendency, to mis-attribute white self-destruction and violence to psychological states or to obscure the impacts of defending whiteness through emotional euphemisms, is a common practice. For example, the disaggregated drivers of all-cause white mortality (conditions such as suicide, chronic liver disease, and drug and alcohol poisoning) have been described as “diseases of despair” rather than diseases of disproportionate opportunity (to wield firearms) and access (to prescription opiates). Media responses to white perpetrators of mass shootings have cited abstract “mental illness”, labelled shooters as “lone wolves”, and treated their violence as idiosyncratic rather than the deadly confluence of white racial terrorism, patriarchy, and liberalised access to guns. Even research examining the relation between whiteness and health suggests psychological “distress” contributes to how whiteness impairs health. And increasingly, intellectuals rapt with the concept of “white fragility” focus on the emotional discomfort white people experience when confronted with their racism, rather than the legacy of death in whiteness’s wake. To assert that resentment, despair, or any emotion that arises from being “left behind” accounts for white Americans’ self-destructive actions, violent politics, or declining population health misses two counterpoints.
First, if any population has been left behind in America’s colonial-turned-industrial-turned-technocratic political economy, it is Black (and Indigenous) people.
Academic Whiteness Studies is extremely intellectual, so unless you are as highbrow as Rhea Boyd MD, you probably won’t understand her complex worldview, which is:
Blackness is Goodness. Whiteness is Badness.
Excuse me, my apologies, what I meant to say is:
Blackness is Goodness, but whiteness is badness.
As all of us Woke Folk now know, Blacks deserve capitalization but whites do not.
Yet scholars, the media, and the public seem intent on viewing white voter patterns post-2016 and rising white deaths post-2010 as born of recessions, resentment, and racial divides. This myopathy overlooks the evolving ways white Americans continue to mobilise to maintain or extend the exclusive advantages whiteness offers those who can become white, even as those advantages place them in increasing proximity to death. When confronted with self-inflicted or white on white violence, scholars, the media, and the public are evading the logical conclusion—one Metzl both illuminates and eschews—despair isn’t killing white America, the armed defence of whiteness is. To be clear, it is not that amid the armed defence of whiteness some people have inadvertently or indirectly died. Rather, death is the inevitable consequence of the full realisation of structural racism and the exclusive rights and resources it offers those who can become white. This type of death is perhaps more easily recognised when it is sudden and violent—like the deaths of Addie Mae, Cynthia, Carole, Carol Denise, Johnny, and Virgil. But it can also be “slow and [nearly] invisible”, as it is among white Americans who will deteriorate from chronic liver disease or substance use. Ultimately, white racial terror can strike by blunt force or decaying infrastructure, through frank abuse or frank neglect. It can kill babies or mothers, immigrants or Indigenous peoples. But within a white racial ordering of humans, rights and resources, non-white and/or Black deaths become naturalised and expected. And white deaths appear to be the aberration. But they evidence the rule, not the exception. For humans to use whiteness to manufacture access and privilege, they must engineer scarcity and loss.
Scarcity is a social construct. Without People of Whiteness engineering scarcity, there’s be plenty of cargo for everybody.
This entanglement between access and scarcity, privilege and loss, means white people’s unearned advantages have always been tethered to a legacy of untold deaths. This is not the result of an emotional positioning, but a structural one. In Dying of Whiteness, Metzl intricately outlines this structural framework but too often anchors it to an emotional foundation his analysis both critiques and depends on. This is perhaps why his conclusion is to “Promote more healthy and self-reflective frameworks…of structural whiteness” when the only solution is to eliminate whiteness all together. Because the consequences of structural whiteness are fatal and as new populations seek its exclusive advantages, the associated harms continue to unfold. For example, as some Asian American students challenge affirmative action, they not only risk eliminating opportunities for higher education they also risk decreasing life expectancy for affected non-white and/or Black students too. And as Hispanic Americans increasingly select white on the census, it reveals pressures to assimilate that may endanger their population health as well. … The solution to defending whiteness is not self-reflection. It is not a difficult conversation. And it is not centring white emotions, however distressing they may be. The solution is those who can become white must summon the courage to unbecome white and then to eliminate whiteness, “the system, the way of life, the philosophy [producing] murderers”.
[Archive link]
Similarly, I’m about to say something you might not be ready to hear.
But I’m going to say it anyways.
Starvation wasn’t killing kulak Ukrainians. The obstinate defense of structural kulakness was.
The solution?
Eliminate kulakness all together.
In summary, it’s time for more People of Whiteness to take seriously the acronymized message of Diversity Inclusion Equity before the Woke are forced to move on to the Inclusion Equity Diversity phase of the struggle.
Dear Dr. Boyd:
I love your Haiti 1804 vibe!https://t.co/LvxQhJ8UBo
Your message to your critics is simple:
Diversity Inclusion Equity, You Trolls. — Steve Sailer (@Steve_Sailer) January 11, 2020
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-01-11--Military Becoming Increasingly Hereditary

From the New York Times news section : Who Signs Up to Fight ?
Makeup of U.S .
Recruits Shows Glaring Disparity More and more , new recruits come from the same small number of counties and are the children of old recruits .
COLORADO SPRINGS — The sergeant in charge of one of the busiest Army recruiting centers in Colorado , Sergeant First Class Dustin Comes , joined the Army , in part , because his father served .
Now two of his four children say they want to serve , too .
And he will not be surprised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision once they are a little older .
… “ Show me a better deal for the common person , ” he said .
Soldiers like him are increasingly making the United States military a family business .
The men and women who sign up overwhelmingly come from counties in the South and a scattering of communities at the gates of military bases like Colorado Springs , which sits next to Fort Carson and several Air Force installations , and where the tradition of military service is deeply ingrained .
More and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old recruits .
In 2019 , 79 percent of Army recruits reported having a family member who served .
For nearly 30 percent , it was a parent — a striking point in a nation where less than 1 percent of the population serves in the military .
For years , military leaders have been sounding the alarm over the growing gulf between communities that serve and those that do not , warning that relying on a small number of counties that reliably produce soldiers is unsustainable , particularly now amid escalating tensions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ families who have borne nearly all of the burden , and are the most cleareyed about the risks of war , are still the Americans who are most likely to encourage their sons and daughters to join .
… The main predictors are not based on class or race .
Army data show service spread mostly evenly through middle-class and “ downscale ” groups .
Youth unemployment turns out not to be the prime factor .
And the racial makeup of the force is more or less in line with that of young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killed in Iraq and Afghanistan a lot more per capita because they tend to be more gung-ho about combat jobs .
My estimate is whites were 89 % more likely per capita than nonwhites to get killed in Iraq and 146 % more likely in Afghanistan .
( Those figures are not widely known , by the way .
Who would be interesting in something as boring and trivial as that ?
Now back baseball statistics ! )
Black recruits tend to be the children of blacks who served .
A 1997 book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that even by then there were a lot of two or three generation black families in the Army ( less so in other branches ) , typically specializing not in combat but in supply paperwork jobs that could then transition to a civilian government job , with an ideal path of collecting two nice pensions .
It ’ s a pretty sensible way to go through life .
… Many schools encourage students to take the military ’ s aptitude exam , the ASVAB , in the way students nationwide are pushed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school is one of the strongest predictors of enlistment rates , according to a 2018 report by the Institute for Defense Analyses .
… The situation is markedly different in regions where few people traditionally join .
In Los Angeles , a region defined by liberal politics where many families are suspicious of the military , the Army has struggled to even gain access to high schools .
By law , schools have to allow recruiters on campus once a semester , but administrators tightly control when and how recruiters can interact with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Lt. Col. Tameka Wilson , the commander of the Los Angeles Recruiting Battalion .
In 2019 the Army made a push to increase recruiting efforts in 22 liberal-leaning cities like Los Angeles .
As part of that , Army Secretary Ryan D. McCarthy visited officials from the Los Angeles Unified School District in December to push for greater access .
“ He was doing a sort of listening tour , ” said Patricia Heideman , who is in charge of high school instruction for the school district and said there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disadvantaged students .
“ I told him from the educator perspective , we sometimes feel they are targeting our black and brown students and students of poverty , ” she said .
And therefore they are less likely to push enlistment .
In reality , the ASVAB/AFQT enlistment test is a big barrier .
Colorado Springs has about 4+ times as many people as Boulder , so the per capita difference is a little over 6 to 1 .
The article ends with a nice human interest story about a young woman from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , famous for ski bums and punching Charles Murray , but really wanted to be a K-9 officer so she ’ s finally enlisted .
Tom Wolfe implied in his 1979 book The Right Stuff that the military officer corps was becoming more hereditary 60 years ago :

From the New York Times news section:
Who Signs Up to Fight? Makeup of U.S. Recruits Shows Glaring Disparity
More and more, new recruits come from the same small number of counties and are the children of old recruits. By Dave Philipps and Tim Arango
Jan. 10, 2020 COLORADO SPRINGS — The sergeant in charge of one of the busiest Army recruiting centers in Colorado, Sergeant First Class Dustin Comes, joined the Army, in part, because his father served. Now two of his four children say they want to serve, too. And he will not be surprised if the other two make the same decision once they are a little older. … “Show me a better deal for the common person,” he said. Soldiers like him are increasingly making the United States military a family business. The men and women who sign up overwhelmingly come from counties in the South and a scattering of communities at the gates of military bases like Colorado Springs, which sits next to Fort Carson and several Air Force installations, and where the tradition of military service is deeply ingrained. More and more, new recruits are the children of old recruits. In 2019, 79 percent of Army recruits reported having a family member who served. For nearly 30 percent, it was a parent — a striking point in a nation where less than 1 percent of the population serves in the military. For years, military leaders have been sounding the alarm over the growing gulf between communities that serve and those that do not, warning that relying on a small number of counties that reliably produce soldiers is unsustainable, particularly now amid escalating tensions with Iran. … But the military families who have borne nearly all of the burden, and are the most cleareyed about the risks of war, are still the Americans who are most likely to encourage their sons and daughters to join. … The main predictors are not based on class or race. Army data show service spread mostly evenly through middle-class and “downscale” groups. Youth unemployment turns out not to be the prime factor. And the racial makeup of the force is more or less in line with that of young Americans as a whole,
Whites got killed in Iraq and Afghanistan a lot more per capita because they tend to be more gung-ho about combat jobs. My estimate is whites were 89% more likely per capita than nonwhites to get killed in Iraq and 146% more likely in Afghanistan. (Those figures are not widely known, by the way. Who would be interesting in something as boring and trivial as that? Now back to baseball statistics!)
though African-Americans are slightly more likely to serve. Instead, the best predictor is a person’s familiarity with the military.
Black recruits tend to be the children of blacks who served. A 1997 book about recruiting by Moskos made the point that even by then there were a lot of two or three generation black families in the Army (less so in other branches), typically specializing not in combat but in supply paperwork jobs that could then transition to a civilian government job, with an ideal path of collecting two nice pensions. It’s a pretty sensible way to go through life.
… Many schools encourage students to take the military’s aptitude exam, the ASVAB, in the way students nationwide are pushed to take the SAT. That exposure during school is one of the strongest predictors of enlistment rates, according to a 2018 report by the Institute for Defense Analyses. … The situation is markedly different in regions where few people traditionally join. In Los Angeles, a region defined by liberal politics where many families are suspicious of the military, the Army has struggled to even gain access to high schools. By law, schools have to allow recruiters on campus once a semester, but administrators tightly control when and how recruiters can interact with students. Access is “very minimal,” said Lt. Col. Tameka Wilson, the commander of the Los Angeles Recruiting Battalion. Predictably, enlistment rates are low. In 2019 the Army made a push to increase recruiting efforts in 22 liberal-leaning cities like Los Angeles. As part of that, Army Secretary Ryan D. McCarthy visited officials from the Los Angeles Unified School District in December to push for greater access. “He was doing a sort of listening tour,” said Patricia Heideman, who is in charge of high school instruction for the school district and said there was a perception the military preys on disadvantaged students. “I told him from the educator perspective, we sometimes feel they are targeting our black and brown students and students of poverty,” she said. And therefore they are less likely to push enlistment.
In reality, the ASVAB/AFQT enlistment test is a big barrier.
Even within one state there are striking differences in how communities view military service. Colorado Springs produced 29 times as many enlistments in 2019 as nearby Boulder, a liberal university town.
Colorado Springs has about 4+ times as many people as Boulder, so the per capita difference is a little over 6 to 1.
The article ends with a nice human interest story about a young woman from Boulder who went to pricey Middlebury College, famous for ski bums and punching Charles Murray, but really wanted to be a K-9 officer so she’s finally enlisted.
Tom Wolfe implied in his 1979 book The Right Stuff that the military officer corps was becoming more hereditary 60 years ago:
… for a good thirty years, the rising business classes in the cities had been steering their sons away from the military, as if from a bad smell, and the officer corps had never been held in lower esteem. Well, career officers returned the contempt in trumps.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-01-11--Sultan Qaboos Bin Said of Oman, RIP

Sultan Qaboos Bin Said of Oman, RIP

From the Christian Science Monitor in 1980 : He met the current Sultan some years ago and remembers him as a “ sensitive , gentle , and aesthetic soul , ” very soldierly in demeanor , who remains “ extremely fond of the British family he lived with when he was at Sandhurst.
” A classical music lover , the Sultan is also a great devotee of Gilbert and Sullivan .
In fact , he is said to have brought his entire set of Gilbert and Sullivan records home with him from Britain in 1963 , only to have them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seized power , one of his first action was to order another set of the D ’ Oyly Carte Opera Company classics .
In 1976 , Sultan Qaboos married his cousin Sayyida Kamila who was then 14 .
As yet he has no heir .
Qaboos was born in Salalah in Dhofar on 18 November 1940 as an only son of Sultan Said bin Taimur and Sheikha Mazoon al-Mashani .
[ … At 20 , he entered the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst .
After graduating from Sandhurst in September 1962… After his military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in England and then completed his education with a world tour chaperoned by Leslie Chauncy .
Upon his return in 1966 , he was placed under virtual house arrest in the Sultan ’ s palace in Salalah by his father .
His father was an old time desert sheik who kept the national treasury in a strongbox under his bed .
Dad did not appreciate Gilbert & Sullivan .
Here he was kept isolated from government affairs , except for occasional briefings by his father ’ s personal advisers .
Qaboos studied Islam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His personal relationships were limited to a handpicked group of palace officials who were sons of his father ’ s advisors and a few expatriate friends such as Tim Landon .
Sultan Said said that he would not allow his son to be involved with the developing planning process , and Qaboos began to make known his desire for change—which was quietly supported by his expatriate visitors .
Qaboos acceded to the throne on 23 July 1970 following a successful coup against his father , with the aim of ending the country ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for modernization and development .
… The coup was supported by the British , having been “ planned in London by MI6 and by civil servants at the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office ” and sanctioned by the Prime Minister , Harold Wilson .

From the Christian Science Monitor in 1980:
He met the current Sultan some years ago and remembers him as a “sensitive, gentle, and aesthetic soul,” very soldierly in demeanor, who remains “extremely fond of the British family he lived with when he was at Sandhurst.” A classical music lover, the Sultan is also a great devotee of Gilbert and Sullivan. In fact, he is said to have brought his entire set of Gilbert and Sullivan records home with him from Britain in 1963, only to have them destroyed by his father. When he seized power, one of his first action was to order another set of the D’Oyly Carte Opera Company classics. In 1976, Sultan Qaboos married his cousin Sayyida Kamila who was then 14. As yet he has no heir.
From Wikipedia:
Qaboos was born in Salalah in Dhofar on 18 November 1940 as an only son of Sultan Said bin Taimur and Sheikha Mazoon al-Mashani.[ … At 20, he entered the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst. After graduating from Sandhurst in September 1962… After his military service, Qaboos studied local government subjects in England and then completed his education with a world tour chaperoned by Leslie Chauncy. Upon his return in 1966, he was placed under virtual house arrest in the Sultan’s palace in Salalah by his father.
His father was an old time desert sheik who kept the national treasury in a strongbox under his bed. Dad did not appreciate Gilbert & Sullivan.
Here he was kept isolated from government affairs, except for occasional briefings by his father’s personal advisers. Qaboos studied Islam and the history of his country. His personal relationships were limited to a handpicked group of palace officials who were sons of his father’s advisors and a few expatriate friends such as Tim Landon. Sultan Said said that he would not allow his son to be involved with the developing planning process, and Qaboos began to make known his desire for change—which was quietly supported by his expatriate visitors. Qaboos acceded to the throne on 23 July 1970 following a successful coup against his father, with the aim of ending the country’s isolation and using its oil revenue for modernization and development. … The coup was supported by the British, having been “planned in London by MI6 and by civil servants at the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office” and sanctioned by the Prime Minister, Harold Wilson.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-01-08--A Reader Doubles Down On Hate For VDARE.COM—And White People

You are associated with white supremacy .
But feel free to retract the attacks on me that you published if you want to prove you 're not .
James Fulford writes : I had to search the site for Mr. Farley 's name , because I got him confused with other people named `` Jonathan '' who we may also have attacked .
He was mentioned five times , total , between 2002 and 2008 , mostly because of an op-ed he contributed to the Tennessean , in which he said that all the Confederates should have been hanged [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time of tyranny , ” November 20 , 2002 , PDF ] .
Mr. Farley wrote that “ every Confederate soldier … deserved not a hallowed resting place at the end of his days but a reservation at the end of the gallows.
” Interpreted literally , and you can bet your Confederate nickels that 's how Mr. Farley wants it interpreted , that means Mr. Farley would have liked to murder several hundred thousand to a million white Southerners and thereby virtually exterminate whites in the South .
He 's also mentioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Over Racial Remarks ?
, although he 's actually one of the few known exceptions to that rule—he had to leave Vanderbilt after the publication his ... how shall I put it ?
... hate-filled screed .
You can read his tale of woe here , at the Guardian , and John Derbyshire 's reply to it here .
We 're not planning to withdraw anything , but Farley is now at a black university , so he 's perfectly safe—no amount of hating whites can get you fired from one of those @

Re: James Fulford's article Wikipedia’s “Tainted Sources” On VDARE.com And “White Supremacy”
From: Jonathan Farley [Email him]
You are associated with white supremacy. But feel free to retract the attacks on me that you published if you want to prove you're not.
James Fulford writes: I had to search the site for Mr. Farley's name, because I got him confused with other people named "Jonathan" who we may also have attacked.
He was mentioned five times, total, between 2002 and 2008, mostly because of an op-ed he contributed to the Tennessean, in which he said that all the Confederates should have been hanged [“Remnants of the Confederacy glorifying a time of tyranny,” November 20, 2002, PDF].
The late Sam Francis wrote that
Mr. Farley wrote that “every Confederate soldier … deserved not a hallowed resting place at the end of his days but a reservation at the end of the gallows.” Interpreted literally, and you can bet your Confederate nickels that's how Mr. Farley wants it interpreted, that means Mr. Farley would have liked to murder several hundred thousand to a million white Southerners and thereby virtually exterminate whites in the South.
He's also mentioned in Why Do Only Whites Lose Jobs Over Racial Remarks?, although he's actually one of the few known exceptions to that rule—he had to leave Vanderbilt after the publication his...how shall I put it?...hate-filled screed. You can read his tale of woe here, at the Guardian, and John Derbyshire's reply to it here.
We're not planning to withdraw anything, but Farley is now at a black university, so he's perfectly safe—no amount of hating whites can get you fired from one of those.