The Caffeine Rats

Repost from the old site.
It’s a long story, but the last time I worked consistently, from 1994 to 1996, I was so damn tired all the time that I was drinking lots and lots of caffeine. I figured out all sorts of inventive ways to take it, in pills, in herbal tablets, in drinks, you name it.
Then I added ephedrine. At one point, I was taking one 30mg tablet per hour every waking hour, and my blood pressure was still 103/56. I know it doesn’t make sense.
After a while of this, my blood pressure started going nuts. I eventually stopped getting it checked. I would go into the doctor’s office, and I would openly refuse to have my BP checked. The doctors were getting really mad and telling me I was going to die. I said, “I know,” and shrugged my shoulders. We’re all going to die; this is news?
Every now and then I would get a reading for the Hell of it. One was like 185/107 or something. They gave me a drug called Captopril, and it seemed like it crashed the pressure down, but it also seemed like it made me tired for at least weeks.
I started getting all kinds of weird symptoms from the hypertension (HTN), but people kept telling me I was imagining it because HTN has no symptoms. I had symptoms all right. I had pains in my chest and my throat. I had weird buzzing feelings all over my face and especially in my eyes, where it was sort of a vague pain.
I had pains in my kidneys, and my kidneys tests went off with creatinine too high. That means kidney damage. Worst of all, my feet started swelling, and that was the scariest feeling of them all.
After all, all I was trying to do was work.
America says everyone has to work all the time, or work or die, with the anti-welfare crowd, and my whole life, I’d either been working, in school, or both. If I didn’t take the stimulants, I could not work.
I had chronic fatigue. Eventually, the job ended, in part due to the fact that I would go in and sit there doing nothing much of the day. I actually couldn’t seem to lift a finger. The work was really hard anyway, and it seemed I just couldn’t do it. People kept saying I was depressed, but I insisted I wasn’t.
The job ended, and I lived off my credit card for a while. After a while, that charade could not play out any longer, and I went to a bankruptcy attorney who called me a thief. I got up and walked out of his office and never came back.
The bill collectors started calling, sounding like Cousin Luigi from Detroit. I eventually quit answering the phone. I was still on caffeine, and the BP was still too high.
Eventually, I just declared bankruptcy and blew off $12,000 in debt. Now I was on the credit card black list.
I moved back in with my parents.
I was 41 years old. My life was a wreck.
I was going around to doctors and the diagnosis was “chronic fatigue.” I kept getting treated like shit by doctor after doctor, and I turned into a “doctor shopper.” Not because I was looking for someone to validate my fake symptoms, but because I was getting pissed off at doc after doc treating me like shit. I’d take it for a while, and then say Fuck You and move on, and the new doc would be the same.
I kept noting stuff that made it seem like a sinus infection or allergies, but everyone kept laughing me off. Everyone was saying it was all in my head, and when it came to the illness, everyone was treating me like crap. They kept saying I was depressed. I kept saying No I’m not.
Finally, I went to an allergy doc, and they diagnosed chronic sinusitis.
I’m under treatment, but I haven’t really worked for real for 13 years now.
But during the time I was on tremendous quantities of caffeine, I noticed something.
The caffeine rats.
You see them out of the corners of your eyes. They’re always scurrying, about the size of a rat, and when you turn to look for them, they are gone. I saw them more than once. I scaled down the caffeine, and they went away. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything before or since.
Other drugs have similar syndromes. On ayahuasca you usually see tigers. On high doses of cocaine you start to feel and maybe even see bugs crawling under your skin. They’re called coke bugs.
Then there’s the caffeine rats. I wonder if I’m the only one?

A Skunk and Potatoes Man

Repost from the old site.
When I was working as an anthropologist for a local Indian tribe, I had to go through all of the anthropological literature about the tribe. This took quite some time. There was quite a bit of hostility from the Indians towards the anthropologists, which is stupid, sad and mostly just ignorant.
The legend had grown up among many of the Indians that the anthropologists who had come through were the “enemies of the Indian people.” I researched the folks who had come through and it didn’t seem to fit.
We are talking some of the biggest names of all like Alfred Kroeber. Kroeber and his wife loved the Indians in a time at the turn of the century when Indians were not so popular. The legend continued that the crafty Indians, in order to fool the wicked White men, had concocted lies to tell the anthropologist.
Anthropological field work is hard enough without having to deal with this kind of crap, but it does come up at times. Fieldwork manuals will tell you, first of all, that you need to develop a strong sense of cultural relativity if you are going to do fieldwork.
You have to decide that pretty much whatever it is these folks do in terms of their culture and values, no matter how weird, stupid, horrible or noxious, it’s ok. You aren’t going to make any judgments about it. You want to chop off little girls’ clits? Ok, no big.
You put grandpa on an ice floe when he gets old? Understandable, I’d do the same with my own Dad.
You treat your women like shit? Hey, I can understand, in dating countless women over a lifetime, I’ve built up a nice boiling witches brew of hatreds and grievances myself. Keep them ball-breaking bitches down! You go, guys! Show them cunts who’s in charge! Damn right they better put out or else! They owe us! We rule!
I think you get the picture.
This sort of thing may prove difficult for many folks.
In fieldwork, you need to do this to get along properly with your subjects. If you don’t accept their lifestyle with “unconditional positive regard,” it’s probably not going to work very well. You get subjects lying to you, like they did with Margaret Mead, and all sorts of stuff.
I actually spent a lot of time on this agonizing question, and I called up famous anthropologists all over the country in trying to solve this empirical question. Had the evil White anthropologists really been had by these crafty noble savages, fresh out of Paleolithic?
Turns out they probably had not. Further, I uncovered a lot of data that suggested that all of the anthros had had a good relationship with their informants.
Another thing you can do is go through all of the old data and see how well it all lines up. Turns out that all of the data I had from 1873 through 1970 lined up very well.
There were times when I spotted some lying. Indians said that wild horses and buffalo used live in Central California, and they used to hunt them. The last wild horses lived here 10,000 years ago, and buffalo never did. The anthro himself wrote in his field notes that he thought they were lying to him.
There are several ways to test this. One thing you can do is to interview informants over a period of time, say weeks or months. You can work with a single informant any number of times over that period. You can ask the same question over and over a few times and see if the answers vary.
Another thing you can do is go around to different informants and ask the same question. If only one informant says, yeah, we ate vultures for breakfast and the others say, “Hell no, we did not, he’s lying,” then vulture-eater is probably lying.
You can interview informants alone and with others, changing the others around, and see if their stories change when they are with various others compared to what they say when they are alone. You can shoot questionable material to others and see if they back it up. In fact, you need to try to back up all of your data. One informant is pretty shaky.
It all rests on the sort of relationship you have with your informants. Bad relationship = possibility of poor data. Good relationship portends good data.
I decided that there was some tragic reason why the Indians harbored this hatred for the anthros. Obviously, the anthros just represented Whitey.
Plus many of them had this crazy idea that all the anthros had used the Indians, gone back to Berkeley or wherever and used this illustrious knowledge to write famous books about the Indians and got rich. The anthros got rich, and the Indians never saw a dime. It’s not true, but it felt good to them.
There was a sadder aspect to this anger. All of the great stuff on these Indians had been written by White people. Everything on the language, the culture, everything.
Why couldn’t the Indians write down about their language and culture themselves? The suggestion is that they are too stupid to do that, so they have to have the Smart White Man come and do it for them, and that’s totally humiliating. A reaction to humiliation is rage.
I went through Sylvia Broadbent’s Grammar of Southern Sierra Miwok as part of my work. One informant, who worked as some sort of “House Indian” in Yosemite National Park, was well-known for being a showman, liar, and teller of tales. He also knew a lot of language, but he threw in lots of other words that other informants had never heard before. She ended up rejecting a lot of his data as spurious.
As you can see, this is not exactly hard science. Where do you think “physics envy” comes from? It gets hard to get mathematical proofs of much of anything in the social sciences, which is why the physicists sneer that we our sciences are “soft sciences”.
So much of our judgments in these tough cases in fieldwork is play it by ear, seat of the pants, I know it when I see it, intuitive stuff.
Unfortunately my project floundered over some of the Indians’ rage at the anthropologists. I had gathered all this damned data and was all set to write it up, and the whole thing got shot down.
Because elders said that the Indians had lied to the anthros, every word of the notes was up for grabs. There were known knowns, known unknowns and worst of all, unknown unknowns, the last category being what the otherwise non-empirical Indians deemed the notes.
I was on a salary anyway, so it really didn’t matter.
One of the amusing things was the sort of stuff that they disputed. They were livid about the notes where the Indians said that they used to eat skunks, rattlesnakes and gopher snakes.
Their rejection of this food, of which the rattlesnakes at least are proven to taste precisely like chicken (of course), is based on a primitive but common mode of thinking. Rattlesnakes are poisonous, so they are evil, so they should not be eaten. The suggestion is that the meat is poison too. Only an idiot would eat poison meat.
Skunks smell horrible when you piss them off, so obviously their meat must taste like their horrid odor. Someone else opined that their meat is “probably pretty oily.”
Turns out, according to the New York Times in 1913, skunk is one of the delicacies of the woods, right up there with possum, deer and bear. The main obstacle in the way of proper enjoyment are the speed bumps of human psychology. As long as you associate the meat with skunk-stink, it might taste pretty bad. Convince yourself it’s really Fillet Mignon and dig in for a hearty meal.
Tender eating , skunk meat tastes like either chicken (obviously), goose, duck or rabbit, depending on your powers of dissociation. You really need to figure out how to dress skunk meat properly so you keep the stink away from the choice cuts.
Baked skunk recipe here.
As I feel I’ve been figuratively eating skunk most of my life anyway, I may as well take the plunge some day.
If it’s really as good as they say it is, I assume it will be coming to Chez Panisse or Spago anytime now.
The gopher snake was also rejected as food, but I have often wondered what they tasted like. A while back, I was catching them by the side of the road a lot. If they were near dead, I’d bring them home and throw them on the lawn for my cats to play with, or drag them around on the lawn and let the cats chase them.
Of course I washed the snake blood off my hands and my car. People who saw me doing that still think I’m a really fucking weird person.
After the gopher snake died, I brought it inside and seriously thought about figuring how to cook the sucker. I finally gave up and threw it out in the woods in back. One cool thing about living in the woods is any small dead animal you toss into the woods will always vanish within 1-2 days max. Carrion doesn’t stick around long in nature; it’s the feral equivalent of dumpster-diving.
I later asked some people how to slice up and cook a gopher snake, and everyone I asked thought it was one of the most outrageous things they had ever heard. I guess they still think I’m weird too.
Anyway, the Indians insisted that they never ate gopher snake. “Ugh!” One Indian said, “They taste like dirt. It lives in the ground!” He curled up his nose.
I’m told this is more erroneous thinking, and the guy’s probably never chowed down one anyway. This cognitive error states that a thing tastes like what it lives in. Gopher snakes spent a lot of time in subterranean mode pushing up daisies but living to tell about it, so therefore, they must taste like dirt. It lives in dirt; it tastes like dirt. Probably not. By this logic, pork tenderloin ought to taste like mudpies, and it doesn’t.
Of course, inquiring minds the world over (Well, at least me anyway) are dying to know the ins and outs of how to hunt, kill, and skin skunks. Forget the kitchen for now. Procurement and dressing are tough enough.
Try here. Turns out skunks may be trapped, shot, killed by bow and arrow, drowned or asphyxiated with car exhaust. Clearly the trick is to kill em without getting sprayed. This ends up being quite the challenge. Skunk dressing is so involved that colleges ought to offer six-month courses for certificates in it.
The first story here is quite amusing. It’s pretty much skunk-skinning gone wrong about every way it could. I got a kick.

All the World's a Polygraph, and We Are All Liars

Repost from the old site.
In reference to the title, one time I when I was working as a linguist, this woman from New York came to work for us. She was a bitch from Day One. She knew it all, and boy did she. She was pissed, and after a bit, I figured it out. She had gotten a BA and here she was, slaving as a secretary. What a failure.
She was a vegetarian, and she when I told her I ate meat, she gave me these dagger eyes and said pointedly, “I know. All meat-eaters smell terrible to us vegans.” It just kind of went on and on like that for some time.
Being an introvert and pretty much of a puss at work (I call this the “office puss” role that men who work in offices must play), I kept on smiling and sucking up to her and trying to be nice. Whenever anyone’s mean to us, we introverts usually figure we fucked up and that’s why they are properly treating us with the contempt, scorn, coldness or indifference we deserve. So I kept trying to act better, and she kept being a bitch.
One day she came to me all apologetic and baffled. “I don’t know what’s wrong,” she shook her head. Turned out I wasn’t the only recipient of her bitch-rays. The whole office was.
“The boss told me that I’m not being nice to people but I just can’t see it. I think I’m nice to everyone but she says everyone says I’m mean. None of this makes any sense to me.”
I’d already figured her out long ago. She was a headstrong, independent type. Within a few weeks of moving from New York to California, she had herself a decent guy and had already moved him in. Good work. Boy, women have it so tough. They can get laid anytime they want. I’m crying so hard for them now I can barely type.
She had the got it together mindset that tended to look down on 90% of the population as fuckups.
And one thing you need to know about angry people is that 95% of the time, 95% of angry people deny their anger and general shittiness, especially when they are beating up on weaker people, which all angry people do. I’m not sure what the psychological mechanism is, but I think it’s important to know this. Ever heard an angry person say, “I’m an asshole but I just can’t stop. I need Assholes Anonymous.”? Course not.
Anyway, she came from New York and brought her New York Bitch attitude with her. Back there, it’s normal. I guess they say, “Have a nice day” the same way we say, “Fuck you.”
She was here to apologize to me for being a bitch, on bosses’ orders under penalty of being fired if not done, though she had done nothing. Would I accept her apology? Sure. Was she being a bitch? Well, yeah, she was, I nodded.
Look, kiddo. I sat down on the curb with her.
This is how you do it. You need to start faking your feelings. I asked her how she felt about her boss and her co-workers. I think she hated the boss, but I’m not sure about the co-workers. She liked me just fine, though she treated me like shit, but she could not see it.
I said, “Look. The boss pisses me off too. And some of these co-workers really piss me off. But I’m not sure if they know it. What do I do? I disguise my feelings. Here is what you do. Go ahead and feel any way you want about your boss and co-workers, but adjust your feelings when you have to actually deal with them.”
“Say you have to go talk to the boss. Forget that you hate her. Walk into the room, smile and act like you love her. Don’t fake it, because that shows. Actually brainwash yourself into thinking she is the greatest boss in the world and believe it as hard as you can.
“Then after you walk out the door, mutter under your breath what a bitch she is. This is what you do. You play roles all the time. I usually don’t show people my true feelings and I’m always putting on some kind of show or other.”
She was dumbstruck.
“You actually do this? How long have you been doing this?”
“Oh, ten years at least, maybe even longer.”
Then she started in about how this was awful as it was not genuine and honest. It was lying. This was horrible and dishonest and probably even ought to be illegal. Anyway, it was immoral. In New York, everyone wears the heart on sleeve, and that’s they are all so ornery. But at least they are moral.
This thing I was arguing, it was so – Californian! To put on a mask, to lie to everyone, to lie all the time, to always be faking it, to never be real.
“Well,” I suggested. “What good is being honest when it gets you fired?”
She did agree that I had a point.
“Look,” I said. “Another thing you can do is save it up. All day long, no matter how much you hate the boss, every time you think of her, think of how actually you really love her and she is the greatest boss on Earth.”
“At 5:03 PM, as you are pulling onto the highway to drive home, you may begin cursing the evil boss. If need be, you may curse, swear and pound upholstery all the way home. But the next day at work, you put all that away, walk in the door to the greatest boss on Earth again.”
She acted like this was really evil, but I suggested it was better than getting your ass fired. She nodded humbly. She asked me if I did this at work. All the time, I assured her.
Then she went on her way.
Every time she saw me after that, she was always smiling at me and had this really weird look on her face, like she was looking at me trying to figure out what I really thought of her or what in God’s name was going on in my head.
It’s the way you look at some weird object when you can’t figure out what the heck it is, turning it over, poking around at it, putting it up close and then far away, showing it around.
I was a walking fucking enigma.
I’d given her the evil secret of being a 24-7 liar, but at least it was keeping her ass off the curb.

"Rationalization and its Discontents," by Alpha Unit

New post by Alpha Unit, our guest poster.
The late Eldridge Cleaver admitted – in his book Soul on Ice – that he deliberately targeted White women for rape. He did it out of hatred and resentment toward White men. This is well known.
This sociopathic criminal apparently could not bring himself to face his real enemy – the White man. He didn’t go around targeting White men for execution for what they had done to Black men. Instead, he targeted the White man’s woman.
But he was deluded. Who could he have possibly persuaded that his conduct was about anyone other than himself?
Most Black people harbor some resentment toward Whites. Some of it is based on our knowledge and understanding of our history in this country. A lot of it is based on experiences we have everyday in this country. Serious things like being shot and killed because the police think you’re a criminal and you made the wrong move with your hands. Things like that.
Sometimes it’s little things like being followed around in stores, even though you don’t shoplift. Or going up to the counter in a busy establishment to pay for an item and being ignored, while White people who got there after you did are immediately “seen” and served. Or being mistaken for a valet when you’re one of the customers. Every Black person over a certain age has these stories.
But sometimes resentment, or entitlement, is a result of indoctrination. Years ago when I was quite young, I was doing my laundry in the neighborhood laundromat, which was owned by an older White man who was one of the nicest people I had ever met. On this particular day, the White gentleman wasn’t in. But there was a group of Black kids there, some doing laundry and others just hanging out.
These kids had figured out how to manually remove cans of soda from the soda machine–without first inserting coins. And they proceeded to do just that.
The boy removing sodas from the machine was handing them round to his friends, and they were all acting as if there wasn’t anything the least bit improper about what they were doing. The boy looked at me and in a friendly voice asked me if I wanted one. I shook my head and said no. Do you know what they began to tell me, almost in unison?
“But it’s a White man.”
They were telling me that the owner was a White man. So it was okay to steal his sodas.
What?
Who told them that?
What these kids were doing had no more to do with the White Man than what Eldridge Cleaver had been doing. They had given themselves a reason to do something they were already inclined to do.
That’s what people tend to do a lot of the time. They feel inclined to do something, but for all kinds of reasons they have to pretend that it is the perfectly rational thing to do under the circumstances.
But that’s what you have in common with your enemy, you know. He was utterly convinced, too, of the necessity of what he did. Of the importance and appropriateness of it.
Just as you are.

New Daily Record On Robert Lindsay

A new record for 5th highest hits in a day was set on Saturday, August 29th when we got 3,543 hits. There were an additional 83 visits to the old site, where traffic is really dropping off lately, for a total of 3,626 hits total for the day. There were quite a few hits for Final Katrina Death Toll at 4,081, since yesterday was the fourth anniversary of the hurricane.
My death toll is about 2,500 higher than the official one because I included excess deaths that occurred in New Orleans for 6 months after the hurricane. According to the theory of excess mortality, now standard in epidemiology, that is a valid assumption on my part.
No MSM source has linked to my total, but the MSM pretty much ignores bloggers anyway. I don’t know if they think we are competition or if we are somehow below them, but it’s like we’re not even there.
There were also a lot of hits for Liberal Race Realism Starting To Grow. I don’t have any ulterior motives about this project at all. I’m just a standard liberal-Leftist who has finally caved in under the mountain of evidence in favor of race realism.
Now I’m trying to fashion some sort of a liberal project that accounts for these facts of our species, but it’s not so easy, because race realism tends to feed back automatically into racism, supremacism, separatism, apartheid, segregation, which are all various forms of reaction. In particular, it feeds into the Far Right like Traditional Catholicism, libertarianism, Southern Rights idiots, fascism and often out and out Nazism.
Given that, it’s obvious why the liberal-Left fights so hard to deny these facts. Nevertheless, facts are facts, and you can only deny empirical science for so long. I’m convinced we liberal-Lefties are not going to get away with shouting down, bullying, threats and thuggery to make these unpleasant facts go away. At some point the dam’s got to burst.
It’s hard to believe that we keep on setting records here, but we do.

No Mercy For Russians! Now Available On This Blog

I was hosting that video on the new blog I set up on Blogger, Robert Lindsay Returns, but I finally converted it out of .flv and into .wmv format and was able to upload it here. This is really better because now I can put an underage blocker on it to try to keep the kids out.
This video is seriously evil and I really advise regular readers to think twice whether or not you really want to subject your soul to this. I had to watch a bit of it tonite to convert it, and I couldn’t watch it. I removed the screen so just the sound was on, and I couldn’t even handle that. Those poor guys wheezing – Good God, man.
The more I think about this video, the more I think the title should be something Nietzschean like There Is No God. That’s the only sensible lesson you walk away with after watching this mess.
And in case you’re wondering, everyone in the video is dead. Sure, the six executed Russian soldiers are dead, but so are all those Chechen bastards who killed them. After the video was made, the Russian OMON Special Forces tracked these fuckers down and killed just about every single one of them.
They caught the leader later and he was imprisoned. He was later murdered in prison, reportedly by Russian Orthodox prisoners. Rumor has it that they beheaded him. If so, what comes around, goes around. Maybe karma is real after all.
No Mercy For Russians!
Pas de Pitié Pour Les Russes: Les Tchétchènes Sont Des Coupeurs de Ttête! (French translation)
Video Shock: Nessuna Pieta Per I Russi – I Ceceni Sono Tagliatori Di Teste!! (Italian translation)

What Is Solipsism?

In the comments to the post, Even The New Republic Now Calls for a Party Purge of Corporate-owned “Centrists”, James Schipper, an excellent writer, differs regarding my definition of solipsism:

Solipsism, strictly speaking, is the philosophical theory that only I have consciousness. After all, I have no access to your consciousness, so how can I know that are conscious of anything. I can only observe your behavior.

It also means extreme egotism. See here.

a theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own modifications and that the self is the only existent thing; also : extreme egocentrism.

Or here.

Self-absorption, an unawareness of the views or needs of others.

The solipsist differs from the narcissist in that the narcissist is an egotist and has a very high opinion of himself. The solipsist may have a high, low or neutral opinion of himself, but no matter, all he thinks about is himself. The egotist does not care about other people – they’re jerks who really don’t give a damn. The solipsist may well give a damn about others, but they don’t have time to think about them, as they’re wrapped up in themselves all the time.
The narcissist won’t go to their friend’s Dad’s funeral because they doesn’t care that the friend’s Dad died. The solipsist doesn’t go because while he wanted to go out of sympathy (solipsists are sympathetic to others), they were too busy thinking about themselves, and they forgot to go. Or they  went to the funeral, but they couldn’t get into empathizing because they were wrapped up in their own issues during the service.
Similarly, the narcissist doesn’t listen to you because you are not important. They don’t care what you think. You’re nothing; it’s like you are not even there. There is a callousness about this type of thinking. You’re essentially nothing, a zero to them. The solipsist is trying to listen to you, but they’re having a hard time since their mind keeps thinking about themselves and their own stuff, so they keep asking you to repeat things.
The solipsist is not really callous – he’s just self-absorbed!
The narcissist is just an jerk. There are antisocial tendencies built right into the essence of narcissism.
If you tell the solipsist he’s a solipsist, they’re going to feel hurt because most of them are nice people, and they are really are caring and empathetic towards others, but it’s not apparent due to their extreme self-absorption. The solipsist will resolve to think about themselves less, but they may fail.
There are therapies for the solipsist. If they’re not too unhealthy, you can get the solipsist to ask questions to others about their lives and get them to talk about themselves, their lives, their feelings. Have them ask, “And how did that make you feel? That must have felt terrible. I can’t imagine feeling that way…And do you hate your father now because he left you at age three? How do you feel about him now? What do you propose to do about these feelings?”
Most people love it when you ask them about themselves, their lives, their histories, even the inner workings of their own minds, since they don’t get to talk about themselves much.
Then have the solipsist listen to the other person because after all, everyone has something interesting to say. This is good because it gets the solipsist out of their head for once. Then have the solipsist reflect on the experience of listening to the other and how good it felt to get out of their  head for once. There are rewards for being an empathetic listener.
Narcissism is much more difficult to deal with because narcissists by their nature never think that there’s a problem. They enjoy their narcissism, and they don’t know how to get outside of it anyway. It’s all they know. Egotism can be dealt with, but when it gets to the point of narcissism, it’s almost too late. The narcissist can be treated but rarely is, since once again, the narcissist can never see that there is a problem.
All personality disorders are characterized by solipsism or self-absorption. This is why people with personality disorders often seem to have poor memories. I have told personality-disordered persons very important ongoing facts about my life (such as that I collect a trust fund from my late grandfather every month), and then several months later, repeated that fact to them.
Every time, they acted like they were hearing it for the first time. “Really? You get a trust fund? I never knew that!” That’s because they were hearing it for the first time in a way. They registered this important fact about you, but then quickly forgot it, since it’s about you, so it’s not that important. It’s not that they don’t care about you, but more that the personality-disordered person is usually running around in their own head thinking about themselves most of the time, and facts about others are assigned a lesser importance and hence drop out of memory.
One therapy of the solipsist or the egotist is to bluntly tell them, “You know what? You are not important at all. You’re nothing really. No one is important. We are all nothing. We are all grains of sand on the beach or blades of grass in the field.” If you say this to your average person, they freak out, because it offends their egotism and their sense of “niceness.”
But it really is true if you think about it.
The difference between this thinking and an that of an antisocial or narcissist is that the antisocial/narcissist thinks that they;’e God and the rest of the world are grains of sand at Waikiki.
When you lower your own ego to the same debased level as everyone else’s, there is a freedom from the cage-trap known as egotism. The great philosopher Alan Watts talks about this a lot. He’s written a lot on solipsism.

National Review Finally Comes Out Against Illegal Immigration

Stop Illegals, Save CA, from National Review Online. National Review is, of course, the rag of the late William Buckley. Although it was never a neocon rag, when the neocons grabbed power under Bush, NR was not far in tagging along. It never became a staunch neocon outpost like The Weekly Standard, but it got taken over by the Pod People all right.
One of the standard lines of the neocons right and left was that immigration, even illegal immigration, was a fine and dandy thing. This is in keeping with the essentially Jewish nature of neoconservatism. Jews have traditionally supported mass immigration into White Gentile nations in which they are minorities for various reasons that are too complex to go into here, but it isn’t about driving Whites extinct as the anti-Semites insist.
Mostly it’s about making things safe for the Jews. Jews think that monoethnic, monoreligious White countries are bad for the Jews. These places are prone to White Christian ethnic nationalism, and history shows that that’s usually bad news for the Jews. So Jews try to create more multicultural societies in which they figure that the various ethnicities with be so split up that they won’t be able to get together and gang up on the Jews.
Anti-Semites say Jews do this so they can outcompete and rule over the White Gentiles in this lands, but I doubt if that is true. It’s more about what’s good for the Jews and paranoia about White Christian anti-Semitism.
This article is written by Alex Alexiev, and if I am not mistaken, he is a rightwing Russian Jewish ultra-neoconservative. I would have accepted this piece from a conservative WASP type, but from a Russian Jewish neocon?
I’m not sure what’s going on here. Maybe as, similar to my previous post about the apostasy of The New Republic on Centrist Democrats, a lot of useful idiots both right and left are getting fed up with drinking their Kool-Aid dogma. Illegal immigration, especially in California, has gotten so insane that even the most immigration-smitten, corporate-loving Jews have had it up to here with it. Conservatives, after all, are not insane, and it’s hard for any non-Hispanic who is in control of their mental faculties to support the illegal immigration status quo here in California.
What’s even more amazing is it’s hosted on the website of liberal National Public Radio (NPR). I don’t know NPR‘s stance on illegals, but I assume they never met an illegal alien they could not love, like most media liberals. What’s even more odd is that NPR is also full of Jews, this time the liberal variety. Are even liberal Jews starting to enough is enough to lunatic, out of control illegal immigration?
Maybe there’s hope after all.

One Cop No Legs

[wpvideo 6f8JBet8]
Warning! This video has caused adverse reactions, including vomiting, in some viewers. Please exercise caution in viewing this video.
This is one seriously messed up video. A traffic cop in Vietnam gets hit by a truck and is cut in half. For about five minutes, bystanders surround him but don’t know what to do. Idiotically, no other cops, ambulances, doctors, anyone, show up. The poor guy just lies there. However, the video does end at a little over 5 minutes when the ambulance finally shows up.
He realizes what is going on, and it’s like he keeps trying to stuff his guts back in. What’s even more weird is he keeps up a running conversation with the crowd around him the whole time and does not even appear to be in tremendous pain. It’s almost like he’s asking, “Hey, could you stuff my guts back in and put my legs back on please? This is really a drag lying here chopped in half you know. For one thing, I can’t get up.”
People are complaining about the bystanders and saying that they are not doing anything. This is translated into a cultural critique of Vietnam being a backwards Third World mess where life is not valued. However, if you translate the soundtrack from Vietnamese to English, a different picture emerges.
The people are crowding around, telling him to be calm, that they have called the police, but the ambulance is being slowed down by traffic. Others are trying to stop traffic so the ambulance can get through quicker. Yet others suggest getting a local doctor who lives nearby. A Christian woman tells him to pray to Jesus to save himself.
The man says, “I’m going to die…”
At one point, angrily, he says, “Stop taking pictures of me!”
This is making the rounds on the Internet these days and it’s getting pretty popular. It was on Youtube for a bit, but it quickly got removed.
I can’t handle the beheading or murder videos on here at all. I watch em once or twice and then never again. I don’t know if there’s something wrong with me, but this video did not really upset me. For some reason, I thought it was funny. I mean, the guy’s chopped in half lying in the street, and he’s acting like there’s nothing wrong. He’s looking around at the crowd, and it’s like he’s asking them about the weather. Plus, you don’t see the guy die, so it’s not so horrible.
The poor man died on the way to the hospital.
There is some confusion between this man and Peng Shulin, a Chinese man who suffered a similar accident. That incident occurred in China in 1995, and this incident occurred in Vietnam just recently. Peng Shulin survived, but he no longer has legs and has to hop around like a human frog.

Is There a New Anti-Semitism? A Conversation with Raul Hilberg

From an issue of Logos Magazine, Winter-Spring 2007, a conversation with Raul Hilberg, the Dean of Holocaust Studies.
Most Jews are pretty nuts about the subject of the Holocaust, I suppose understandably so. They don’t make sense. Their behavior is more one of a crazy and irrational person than someone saying something sensible or meaningful.
But if anyone has a right to be nuts about the subject, it’s Raul Hilberg. After all, he has been doing little us but immersing himself in Holocaust lore for 60 years, almost all of his life. His 1961 book, The Destruction of the European Jews, is considered to be one the best ever written on the subject, though I have not read it. I read a similar book by Martin Gilbert, The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War, and it was excellent, all 976 pages of it.
An interview with Hilberg is always a joy to read.
He has a calmness and reasonableness about him that is very attractive. Almost everything he says about the Holocaust makes sense.
He points out that Jewish ownership over the word Holocaust is ridiculous. Super-Jews always freak out and scream anti-Semite if anyone else grabs their precious little word for any other reason than the approved one.
Probably in rebellion to this idiocy, there are now Holocausts and mini-Holocausts all over the place. There’s a Holocaust in the animal testing labs. There’s one in Palestine. They’re everywhere. The word the Jews wanted to turn into a Judaic religious object, to be touched only by the Jews like the Talmud, is now a degraded and near-meaningless matter of the public domain.
He also derides The New Anti-Semitism, for obvious reasons. Although a Zionist, he says some interesting things about Israel and praises Norman Finkelstein’s anti-Zionism.
Strangely enough, he makes a case that the Nazis were not anti-Semites but something different altogether.
He notes coldly that there are three solutions to the Jewish Problem: conversion, expulsion and extermination. That’s not something you say in polite company, but you just know it’s true.
He also thinks that Holocaust Denial should not be criminalized and doesn’t worry too much about it. He has previously said that Deniers do scholars some favors by raising a lot of important questions about the Holocaust that scholars need to get cracking on.
That the many Jewish expulsions of Europe began to occur not due to bad Jewish behavior as anti-Semites claim but began when all efforts at conversion of the Jews had failed seems to make sense.
All in all, great read. If more Jews acted like Hilberg, people wouldn’t dislike them so much.

Even The New Republic Now Calls for a Party Purge of Corporate-owned "Centrists"

Even The New Republic Now Calls for a Party Purge of Corporate-owned “Centrists”, by Glenn Greenwald.
Greenwald is one of top liberal bloggers. His site is Unclaimed Territory and gets tens of thousands of hits a day. He was formerly a constitutional law and civil rights attorney, but his blog has been so successful that apparently he has mortgaged it into a writing career and left his lawyer job. He’s authored three books in the past three years and now gets regular writing gigs. It’s hard to believe that he’s making more money writing than practicing law! Here is his former blog, now moved to Salon. The guy made the bigtime with a Blogspot blog! Incredible.
I have not talked any about the health care debate, but I am sure that you know where I stand. Fully 72% of Americans support a public option, and that is what all the fight is about.
The pubic option is much misunderstood. It just means that you will have a choice to buy into a government run health program, which I guess will be something like socialized medicine, i.e. Medicare, Medicaid and that horrible health program that every Congressman has. I really favor single payer, and it’s the best program out there, but I guess it doesn’t have the votes.
The insurance-company run for-profit medicine system is shit. Michael Moore’s movie Sicko makes that quite clear. I don’t understand all these Whites yelling about how great health insurance is. I guess they have not yet gotten too sick or too hurt. After all, the shit insurance model is all based on making money off denying you care. The more care they deny, the more they make. The more care they approve, the less money they make. Now why would it be a good idea to be covered by private medical insurance, given that obvious capitalist reality?
If and when you get too sick or hurt that your insurance plan dumps you (matter of time for most of us), you will have to burn through every nickel you have and every tangible asset you own until you are so damn poor that you can go on Medicaid.
I guess conservatives think that’s cool? What’s so cool about that? I don’t have money or many tangible assets, but if I did, why should have to burn through all of them and go poor just because I get sick or hurt? Why would anyone with money or assets support such nonsense? Why not have the state pay for the care due to my injury or illness, and that way I get to keep all my money and stuff? Which is all conservatives care about anyway, money and stuff.
One big lie is that the public option will drive out all the private insurance companies. Lord, I wish it were true that anything would put this gang of thieves and vipers out of business, but surely a government plan would not.
Left unstated is why the public plan would theoretically put all the private folks out of business anyway. I mean, competition, right? If private insurance is so sucky that anyone with a brain would take off and go buy the public insurance instead, then according to market logic, the private entities deserve to die, right? That’s like Neoliberal Economics 101.
Anyway, there’s nothing to worry about. All you fools who so love your evil private insurance needn’t worry your little heads one bit. My understanding is that in most every nation that has socialized medicine (other than Communist countries), you can still go buy private insurance if you are stupid or masochistic enough. But indeed, my understanding is that hardly anyone does. Once again, if it’s so wonderful, why does hardly anyone buy it in states that have socialized medicine?
So with 72% support for a public option, Obama and the Centrist Dems are caving. How much support would be enough for them not to cave? 80%? 90%? I remember Bill Clinton used to regularly cave in and support issues that had like 2% support, like weakening clean water laws.
You see, as Greenwald points out, this is really all about money. Both parties are controlled by corporate interests, just the Dems somewhat less so. You get a Liberal Corporate Party and a Conservative Corporate Party. Turning the Dems into a corporate party was the brainchild of the Democratic Leadership Committee. Rahm Emanuel is the DLC point man for Barack Obama.
The idea was either Dems or Repubs take corporate money, and if we let the Republicans get the corporate money, they will win every time. If Dems take it too, then we at least get to win sometimes and can come in and kind of sort of maybe almost a little bit once in a while do piecemeal, half-assed reforms here and there.
A health care plan with no public option is shit. There’s nothing in it for me or anyone that I care about. All it does it force everyone to buy the evil called health insurance. If you’re poor or low income, the government subsidizes you so you can buy the shit called health insurance. How is that good for anyone’s health? It’s not. Supposedly it’s good for taxpayers, because we fork over lots of dough to serve the uninsured in emergency rooms. This way they have to buy insurance so we save. Whoop-te-doo.
What good is that? Everyone else is forced to buy this overpriced insurance poison, and many are going to go broke paying for it. If you don’t want to go broke, now the state will force you! Wow, such a wonderful plan. What it really is is the biggest piece of corporate welfare in the history of the US. So billions of working people’s ill-affordable dollars get shoveled to some of the most vile corporate slime in the country. Somebody show me the upside?
Greenwald’s post is interesting.
The New Republic is basically the liberal wing of the neoconservatives. The jerks who known as the Neocons, so prominent in the Bush Administration, are really just the rightwing of that movement. The liberal wing has similar roots as the conservative wing, coming out of the 1970’s, the aftermath of the Vietnam War and in particular the aftermath of the 7 Day War and 1973 Wars in Israel.
The liberal neocons are as Jewish as the conservative ones. These guys are basically the same “Cold War Liberals” as the neocons, but they did not go as far to the Right as the rest of them. TNR spent most of the 1980’s fulminating against the USSR, welfare, liberalism and Arabs while supporting genocidal Latin American regimes like the Salvadorans and of course, Israel.
I used to subscribe to this magazine, but finally I gave it up around 1983. I wasn’t hip to Jews yet, so the magazine mystified me. After it got taken over by uber Israel-firster Marty Peretz, he stacked it from top to bottom with liberal Jewish neocons. About half of every issue was about Jews, Jewry, Israel, Judaism, Judaica or whatever. Even the book reviews was usually some Jewish reviewer reviewing a book by a Jewish guy about Jews.
The whole exercise was one of endless Jewish solipsism. I read all this stuff at the time, but the solipsism never made sense. Only when I figured out Jews did I understand the solipsism. Jews are probably the most solipsistic humans on Earth, part and parcel of their hyperethnocentrism. To Jews, it’s all about the Jews. What’s all about the Jews? Well, everything, pretty much. They just can’t get enough of themselves.
Up until this year, TNR has continued to beat the drum for the Blue Dogs, the liberal neocons, the Democratic Centrists and other losers. Jew Lieberman or Joe Lieberman or whatever his name is is like God incarnate to TNR. SuperJew and Liberal Neocon Jonathan Chait is one of their top writers, and reading him gives you a good insight into the mindset of TNR.
Well, finally, even TNR has had enough with the Rahm Emanuel  – Barack Obama Centrist corporate controlled Democratic Party. They’ve become even too Republican-like for the original Democratic Centrists.
The about-face by TNR, among other things, shows there’s a liberal rebellion growing in the Democratic Party, and it’s one of the most beautiful things I’ve seen in a while.
Let’s water it well and let it grow.

Peter Singer on Darwinian Liberalism

Following on my previous post about the Liberal Race Realist movement, a commenter links to an article by the very liberal philosopher about what he proposes, a movement called the Darwinian Left. He is a much better thinker than I am, so I will just quote him:

A Darwinian left would not:• Deny the existence of a human nature, nor insist that human nature is inherently good, nor that it is infinitely malleable;
• Expect to end all conflict and strife between human beings, whether by political revolution, social change, or better education;
• Assume that all inequalities are due to discrimination, prejudice, oppression or social conditioning. Some will be, but this cannot be assumed in every case;
A Darwinian left would:
• Accept that there is such a thing as human nature, and seek to find out more about it, so that policies can be grounded on the best available evidence of what human beings are like;
• Reject any inference from what is ‘natural’ to what is ‘right’;
• Expect that, under different social and economic systems, many people will act competitively in order to enhance their own status, gain a position of power, and/or advance their interests and those of their kin;
• Expect that, regardless of the social and economic system in which they live, most people will respond positively to genuine opportunities to enter into mutually beneficial forms of cooperation;
• Promote structures that foster cooperation rather than competition, and attempt to channel competition into socially desirable ends;
• Recognise that the way in which we exploit nonhuman animals is a legacy of a pre-Darwinian past that exaggerated the gulf between humans and other animals, and therefore work towards a higher moral status for nonhuman animals, and a less anthropocentric view of our dominance over nature;
• Stand by the traditional values of the left by being on the side of the weak, poor and oppressed, but think very carefully about what social and economic changes will really work to benefit them.
In some ways, this is a sharply deflated vision of the left, its Utopian ideas replaced by a coolly realistic view of what can be achieved. That is, I think, the best we can do today – and it is still a much more positive view than that which many on the left have assumed to be implied in a Darwinian understanding of human nature.

There is not much I can add to this fine piece of eloquence and brilliant thinking, so I will just leave it at that and let the commenters go at it. Singer is definitely a major thinker who is no stranger to controversy.
Also, I would like to reiterate once again that we liberals do not subscribe to all of our crazy views just because we are self-hating Whites or because we are evil or anything like that. As philosopher Michael Levin notes, we believe all this crazy stuff because we want to be good. We want to be nice, and we don’t want to hurt people’s feelings. With all of the other problems Blacks have, why bring up the IQ gap? It’s like kicking a man while he’s down. “Oh yeah, and one more thing, jerk! You’re stupid too!” Even if it’s true, why bring it up? It’s unseemly and mean.
I’m not even sure liberals believe all the crazy stuff we say. Get a liberal alone when no one is listening, and a lot of surprisingly race realist stuff comes out of his mouth. We’re just too nice to talk about it company, and we really want to believe all the crazy alternatives, so that’s what we believe.
Look at the responses of Blacks to my race realist stuff. They come here to the comments section and they’re all huffed up and pissed. They’re also really hurt. We liberals don’t like to make people mad, especially Blacks. We don’t like to hurt their feelings.
And especially, we don’t like the implication in all of this that we are racists. We liberals hate being called racists. It makes us mad and especially it hurts our feelings. We are not racists, so it hurts us and bewilders us to be called that. It’s like calling a thin, pretty woman fat and ugly. She knows it’s not true, but it makes her mad anyway.

Spot The Language 22

Identify the language.
Say where it is spoken (what country, continent or area). Say who speaks it (what race, people or ethnic group). Say what type of language it is, if you can identify it. Extra points for precision.
Example: Basque, spoken in NE Spain by Basques, language isolate not related to anything.
I picked out some easy ones on purpose for starters. All these languages or peoples are fairly well-known, at least to me anyway.
1. Abenaki
2. Afar
3. Akan
4. Alsatian
5. Amharic
6. Aramaic
7. Asturian
8. Assamese
9. Assiniboine
10. Aymara
11. Balinese
12. Baluchi
13. Bikol
14. Brahui
15. Buryat
16. Burushaski
17. Cahuilla
18. Chamorro
19. Chickasaw
20. Choctaw

Liberal Race Realism Starting to Grow

I could not be more happy. This is a movement after all, that I am trying to birth myself. Hell, I may have even founded it.
It’s amazing that more people haven’t come around to it, but the PC Police are very threatening, at least here in California. Voicing the tiniest bit of racial heresy can have consequences such as being threatened with being thrown out businesses, threats and menacing looks from Hispanics, being openly shouted down in public by Hispanics and Blacks, loss of employment, loss of friends, and being labeled as a public pariah.
As far as being threatened with being thrown out of businesses, this has happened to me twice, both times on the most bizarre and ludicrous grounds.
On one occasion, I was accused of “distributing White Supremacist propaganda,” for showing folks a printed out post from this website. On another occasion, once again showing someone a printed out post from this site, I created a strange uproar and was politely told to never utter the word “race” in the place ever again. Such a dirty word!
In both cases, the posts were grotesquely misunderstood because the people reading them were too stupid to figure out what I was trying to say.
I’ve been told by my friends to never mention anything about this site to anyone around here, ever, other than to close friends. Likewise with printed out posts from the site. The reason given is that most people around here, including the Whites, are too stupid to understand this website, hence they will misunderstand it and get all sorts of weird ideas about it and me.
I’ve been stared down, threatened, menaced and spit at by Hispanics for daring to suggest that illegal aliens should take off. I’ve been told to “tone it down” by frightened Whites when discussing the illegal alien problem. Talking shit about illegals is downright dangerous in this town, seeing as they and their Frankenstein anchor baby offspring are probably about 1/2 the population.
I’ve been told that most of the Hispanics around my apartment complex regard as some sort of a virulent White Supremacist neo-Nazi skinhead type. I’m not really sure why they think this way, but that’s how these morons judge you if you’re not 100% in favor of America-suicide Political Correctness. In their own way, these Hispanics as bad as the worst Jews.
Given all this PC thuggery, it’s no wonder that White liberals are still drinking the PC Koolaid. Nevertheless, there does appear to be some hope. Check this out: Scroll down to “By elitist on 1/17/09 at 12:33 pm.”

DESPERATELY NEEDED are fora/support groups for progressives/moderates who are waking up to the reality of racial difference, but are not in the least attracted to white supremacy, antisemitism, climate change denial, hatred of Modern Art etc., guns, Neanderthal “barefoot and pregnant” anti-feminism, homophobia, medieval religiosity, etc.
Who do sincerely wish blacks, mulattoes and members of all races well, but who want an end to mass immigration, quotas, race blackmail, and speech censorship.
Speaking as a lifelong (and still) liberal, I maintain that it is wrong for progressives to cede a monopoly on the science of race to genuine racists and to work to maintain a firewall between science and public domain, all the while isolating themselves from the black community because they are frightened and intimidated, frankly, by the aggression and unthinking, superstitious mentality of most blacks, and by their astoundingly crude and bizarre ideological prejudices, and most of all by their open hostility toward whites and their boundless sense of entitlement.
We need an enlightened discourse on race that is free of all the above baggage, and that denigrates no one group but is based on a healthy dose of realism and skepticism, and on a robust pride in the achievements of European civilization.
Given the very real dangers to the livelihoods and social statuses of individuals who explore these “dangerous ideas,” we need a “RACE REALISTS ANONYMOUS,” a safe space for people to discuss their fears openly and without risk of exposure.
Whites are totally exhausted with being blamed for the seemingly intractable problems of the Black community in the US and elsewhere, and given the widening pathologies of that community, are tired of pretending to see a light at the end of the tunnel.
Race difference is indeed the great taboo in our culture, but under the sheer weight of reality, it is starting to break down.
Impossible and oxymoronic as it sounds, liberal race realists need to develop a coherent progressive discourse about racial difference – and fast!!
This does not mean “making racism respectable,” it means giving the majority of whites a coherent position that is both realistic and respectful of all races.

What’s fascinating is that I have just now started to see some more folks refer to themselves as “liberal race realists.” It’s like a whole new movement coming out of the woodwork.
And indeed, the pro-White movement reeks of White Supremacism, anti-Semitism, anti-feminism, gun nuttery, homophobia, lunatic anti-environmentalism to the point of Climate Change Denial and hatred of Modern Art, Modern Music, Modern Literature, Modern Culture and indeed Modernity itself. To this I would add hatred for any kind of Left economics.
The whole movement is just reactionary to the core. It ranges from Paleocons to Neocons like Guy White to Libertarians like the “cognitive elite” HBD bloggers like One STDV and Half Sigma. Liberals just want to throw up their arms and run away screaming.
More importantly, we leftwing idiots, as the author points out, have effectively ceded this entire issue to the Right. We have no position on race realism, other than liberal thuggery, contempt for and demands for censorship of science (!!), threats, career destruction, and just shouting, “No! No! No!”
It’s true that race realism, due to the nature of its facts, tends to feed automatically into conservatism, not to mention reactionary views and out and out fascism. But it need not be this way. If race realism, is, after all, simply the truth, then liberals out to be able to fashion some sort of liberal discourse out of this difficult position. Why not? We can come up with a liberal position on just about anything, why not race?
For starters, as the author points out, a position statement could be opposition to:
Mass immigration
Quotas
Race blackmail
Speech censorship
I’m actually somewhat agnostic on affirmative action, but it sure has lots of problems. The public seems to be against it, and initiatives all over the US are killing it off anyway. It’s sort of a non-issue that seems to be taking care of itself.
Race blackmail is something that gets little discussion. I’m not sure what exactly he’s referring to here, but I don’t like the sound of it. I think I’m against it too. Is it something like, “Don’t you dare deport those illegals, or we will riot and burn down L.A. again?”
Speech censorship should be the last thing that true liberals are doing, but here we are, wielding the black pen, deleting, shutting down, burying and gagging speech everywhere in sight. Why? We don’t want the truth getting out! How cowardly can you get?
Anyway, it’s nice to see that this movement is finally getting some legs. I thought I was alone for a while.

More On Who Were the Ancient Romans

A new comment on the previous post offers the best explanation yet.

The statues and paintings do not look like Meds or anyone else it seems. Their facial appearance was not as attractive as Meds or modern Italians (who are an extreme mixture of everything).
They were a bit shorter than the German/Celts but were much more muscular. The few bones (ancient original Romans used cremation) showed heavy muscularity, much greater even than Moderns.
My premise is that the Roman style of fighting served the infantry well, and their battles were of brute strength. Their sword the Gladius used was not as good as the Celtic sword in many ways. The Celtic sword has been shown superior in computer tests. However, the Roman style was to fight in a compact manner and use their superior physical strength it seems.
They were even outnumbered by great margins it just about all battles. This fact seems to not to carry much weight, but in hand to hand combat it does. How the Romans won these battles was in part organization, but the endgame was really genetics.
Where they came from is anybody’s guess. They do not appear to be like anyone but Romans.
Of course in the later stages they were just a mix, sort of like modern day Italians.

Well, sure. It’s all starting to make sense now. Along with the earlier post, We Are Not Our Ancestors , it’s all starting to come together. The Romans, like many other ancient peoples of Europe and probably of other places, were part of a race or ethnic group that no longer exists.
This is why the Meds and Nordicists have been fighting so long about whether the statues and paintings are Meds or Nords. The reason it’s controversial and hard to figure out in the first place (hence the debate) is that the Romans were neither!
They were not Nordics or Germans, nor were they Italians or Meds. They were an extinct race, vanished from the Earth. It’s nice the way some unknown commenter comes along and so neatly ties together loose ends.
I found it very interesting that the Romans were outnumbered in almost all their battles but won most of them anyway. The commenters theory sounds better than any others out there. Most combat was indeed hand to hand back in those days. What a terrifying way to fight a war!. Can you imagine having to go hand to hand with a deadly enemy in a kill or be killed battle? I’d rather take my chances in modern way any day.
As a side note, I am really getting tired of all of these races and ethnic groups claiming the achievements of ancient folks as their own. In many cases, the great ancients do not seem like the ancestors of those puffing their chests.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (1932-2009)

RIP Teddy Kennedy.
He authored of the 1965 Immigration Act that got rid of quotas that mandated that 90% of our immigration should come from Northern and Western Europe, for which he is hated by White nationalists. This bill was written to keep out Eastern and Southern Europeans, not Mexicans and Chinese.
At the time, the nation was full of hatred for Eastern and Southern Europeans, who were regarded as grossly inferior to the Nordic founding stock of America (of which I am a member – 5/8 British, 1/4 German, 1/8 French). Even Jews were regarded as inferior. IQ tests were showing Italians and Jews with IQ gaps as large as that between Blacks and Whites. Italians in particular (and to some extent Jews) were associated with crime, social decay, gangs, ghettos, etc. the same way that Blacks and Mexicans are now.
Considering all this, it’s interesting that these groups are now fully integrated into the US middle class. There is little to no evidence that they are inferior to Nordic Whites. The ghettos, squalor, crime and gangs are a memory.
At the time, the nation was so nuts about these groups that a proposal was made to sterilize them and to put them into camps to deal with them later. The model was eugenics, the same theory that drove the Nazis to their mass murder. The camps could have conceivably been used to kill these White inferiors, though that would have been odd. The nation was so in thrall to eugenics at the time and so contemptuous of these so-called inferior Whites that the only reason the proposal was shot down was that it would cost too much and require too much outlaw in manpower and materials.
When Calvin Coolidge signed the bill, he made a remark about how the US was a Nordic nation and commented on the necessity to keep out these European “inferiors.”
So given the stupid Nordicism behind that bill, it’s a good thing that it finally did get amended. Supposedly, the quotas were changed so that 90% of the immigration was supposed to come from non-White areas instead of White areas, but I’m not sure if this is true. It would seem reasonable to make immigration quotas much the makeup of the state – that is, if the US was 90% White in 1965, 90% of quotas should have been reserved for Whites, broadly defined.
Anyway, according to White nationalists, this bill sealed the doom on White America. They may be correct, but I don’t really care that the US will eventually become a non-White country. I’m more concerned about the rate at which the non-Whites come here and the quality of the non-Whites and their assimilation potential. After all, I grew up in a California that was 20-30% non-White, and that was fine with me.
On the other hand, I don’t even recognize my state anymore. Immigration is more a problem of too much, too soon and way too many low quality Third World peasants and urban poor types who offer no benefit to the US and lots of downside.
On top of that, it’s true that Teddy was behind the latest Amnesty bill too, along with Juan McCain. This one failed, and it would have amnestied in 20 million illegals and then, via chain immigration, would have allowed 60-80 million more relatives in. This is the outrage that Obama is determined to pass. If this bill passes, America as we know it will be gone forever and we will have to decide which type of Latin American country we are going to be.
Teddy was also involved in the Chappaquiddick outrage, where a drunken Teddy drove his car off a bridge into a river, then made his way out of the car to the shore while his young female passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, drowned.
For this, amazingly, he apparently served no time at all. It was clearly a case of vehicular manslaughter. He delayed showing up at the police station until the booze had worn off. For this, he was hated forever by the Right, but you know if one of their heroes had done it, the Right would have supported him anyway and not trifled a second over it.
Despite the Amnesty outrage and Chappaquiddick, I still don’t hate Teddy Kennedy. Maybe I should. But he was one of the greatest modern US liberal senators, always solid in his principles, and rarely selling out to the Right or Far Right the way so many of these fake liberals like Chris Dodd, Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama do.
He was a real liberal, always great on health care, the environment, gay rights, civil rights, you name it. He always stood up for and fought for poor, low income and working class people. I suppose that his immigration craziness was just part and parcel of his liberal. There is an interview with Michael Levin in a recent issue of American Renaissance where he says something very sensible about liberals. Liberals are wrong on race, he says, but they mean well. They have good intentions, in contrast to conservatives who are just flat out mean.
This is important to note. Liberals like Kennedy honestly do not think or realize that legalizing 20 million illegals followed by 80 million chain immigrants is bad for America. They still believe in the Emma Lazarus and Statue of Liberty myth – “Give me your tired, your poor. Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.” They don’t do it because they are White self-haters or anything like that.
A Teddy Kennedy Presidency would have been a very interesting one, but after Chappaquiddick it was doomed. Teddy may have even been so liberal as to scale back US imperialism, something no liberal US President has ever done.
Kennedy was an inveterate womanizer and tales about him are legendary. Once in the Senate Dining Room, a young female dived under the table to service him, hidden by the draping tablecloths. He especially loved young women, even into middle age and possibly beyond. I don’t care about this, and I wish I could emulate him. Teddy was a heavy drinker too, an Irishman. You could see the damage the booze had done to him later in his puffy and reddened face. Nevertheless, he lived to age 77, and was finally killed by a brain tumor, not booze.
He was ill in recent days, and last week, he took time off from the Senate for medical reasons. In less than a fortnight, he was gone, dead 11 PM PST last night. Teddy was well-liked by all of his fellow Congressmen, even his conservative enemies. He was part of their club. He apparently had a warm, charming, engaging and charismatic personality.
Teddy was of course related to John F. Kennedy, assassinated US President and Robert F. Kennedy, assassinated US Presidential candidate front-runner. He was the Great Little Brother.
RIP Teddy Kennedy.

Comments Deleted on Great Article on Black Crime

Black Crimes are Foundation of Whites’ Fears.
This fascinating article by an apparently non-racist Yale English professor which ran recently in the New Haven Register generated an incredible number of comments.
It included the usual crap from PC anti-racists. One Jewish guy demanded that the article be censored and removed, and then demanded a law forbidding all publication of “hate speech”, which presumably this article would fall foul of. Of course the usual crap from Black commenters was also on display. And sadly the piece did generate some racist comments, probably due to it being widely posted to White nationalist fora.
However, many of the comments were very reasonable and spot on, in line with the article.
They simply stated the obvious.
Whites flee as areas become too Black not because they hate the way Blacks look, or they hate the color of their skin (This is the typical conceit of Blacks – you hate us because of the color of our skin!), or they just hate Blacks for no good reason at all, apparently just because they are different or because they are just not White folks. Sure, some Whites hate Blacks for these reasons, but most do not.
How do I know this? I’ve lived around White people my whole life, and I know my people very well. I have heard Whites expressing negative comments, including racist ones, about Blacks more times than I can count.
I’m convinced that if Blacks acted more like Whites or Asians and less like Blacks that not too many folks would have issues with their skin color or their facial structure or what not. A few would, but not most.
The truth is that what Whites really hate about Blacks is crime. As the % of Blacks in an area goes up, so does the crime rate. It doesn’t go up much up until 20% or so (This implies that most 1-20% Black cities and towns ought to be fairly tolerable), but it really starts to go nuts around 30%. From there on out, with each decimal increase in the % of the area that’s Black, the crime rate flies up again, often at astounding rates.
We can go on and on about how Black criminals target mostly Blacks, but that’s not what matters. They target Whites too, and White towns and cities tend to be fairly low crime (I’ve lived in several, and that’s been the case every time).
In addition, it really doesn’t matter what’s causing Black crime. If they’re just born that way, or if poverty does it, if Black culture does it, or if racism does it, none of this matters. This is why the usual liberal-Left screeching about how all Black crime is caused by poverty or crime is irrelevant. One brings up Black crime and the Leftie starts screaming that it’s all caused by poverty or racism or whatever, as if this is supposed to end the discussion and negate the reality of the subject.
Suppose Black crime is all caused by mean Whites (racist theory) or poverty? What relevance does that have to Whites deciding on which town to move to, or watching nervously as their town slowly darkens? None whatsoever. The damned crime rate is going to go up come Hell or high water no matter what’s causing it, and that’s all that’s important to the Whites living there.
All that matters to White crime victims is that they got victimized. Let’s ask the victims. So racism made the mugger do it. So what? They still got mugged, dammit, the victims think. Assuming racism really did do it, then they should stay in this town to get mugged again then?
As the White person is getting mugged, they are supposed to think, “Wow, this guy is mugging me due to racism. That means I’m going to stay here and maybe get mugged again. But if he doing it because he’s an evil criminal instead, I would fly out of here tomorrow!”
This is why the liberal/Left derailing of all of these conversations into irrelevancies like, “Whites are twice as likely to molest kids,” “Whites commit the majority of crime in the US,” and other Tim White-isms is ridiculous. Have you ever heard of a White person, or any person for that matter, say, “No way am I moving to that White town! Whites commit most of the crime in the US!” Or, “No way! I will never live in a White area! Whites molest children!”
Just to show you the power that PC still holds over us, the 100’s of comments that this article quickly generated have now all been deleted, and are not even available on cache. That’s typical, but do you think this PC censorship is going to be able to go on forever? How long before people have had enough of it?
That’s right, Lefties. Censor all talk of Black crime. That’ll make it go away.
Not.

Why Do Women Orgasm?

Here.
Along with lots of other questions. Evolutionary biologists are looking into these matters, which all evolved in Africa, so we get to blame or praise Blacks for all the stuff below. For big tits on women, I say thank YOU Blacks! For female orgasms, women the world over, even Aryan women I suppose, stand up and throw a deafening shout out to Black folks. Who says Blacks never gave us anything?
For prolonged periods, many women will find one more thing to curse those darn Negroes about
Such as, why are females’ boobs so huge? No other mammal has such huge and basically useless boobs. There’s no reason for them to be so massive, and most of the tissue is just fat that serves no purpose. Many explanations are offered for huge tits, but none of them seem to make much sense.
Why do women bleed so much when they menstruate? Only a few other mammals bleed much. A few bleed a bit midcycle, but none do like human women. What’s the purpose of sloughing off the entire uterine lining every month? To me, the best explanation offered was that females that sloughed off the entire lining and grew a fresh new one every month had the best chances of implanting an egg. Many would-be pregnancies fail due to failure of the sperm to implant in the embryo. Nothing is noticeable, it just looks like another period at the end of the month. But conceivably an older lining is more likely to fail.
In our nearest relatives, the Great Apes, it is quite clear when the female is ovulating and available for pregnancy – her backside swells up like a balloon basically saying, “Come fuck me guys! All the fucks you want, no charge until the sale ends!” In contrast, it is either impossible or nearly impossible for others to know when a woman is ovulating. I assume it’s totally impossible for a male to figure this out.
Even more bizarre is that the time of fertility is hidden even to the woman. Women have no idea when they can get knocked or not, really, despite what the Catholics say. It’s a mystery hidden even to the woman herself. Why? Many explanations are offered for concealed ovulation, but none of them seemed to make much sense to me.
Same thing with female orgasm. Guys need to come. If we don’t, no babies get made. But female orgasm does not seem to serve any purpose. Orgasm serves no fitness purpose in females and other a few other female mammals do it too. There is another issue, and that is that female orgasm has unfortunate tendency in quite a few women to be notoriously unreliable – a 44 year old girlfriend of mine, who loved sex, by the way, despite the fact that she never got off – told me that she had had one orgasm in her life, at age 15. She ain’t the only one.
Then we come to menopause. Women can no longer have kids past age 50, but most other female mammals can bear kids far into old age. No other mammals have menopause except for the short-finned pilot whale. I did not find any of the explanations for menopause very satisfactory either.

Un Bisturi Una Cisti

[wpvideo lPymBw0E]
This post has been translated into French as Un Bistouri Un Kyste (en Français).
This is an Italian translation of the One Lance One Cyst video by Natalie of France, my finest translator. Enjoy.
Questo video è veramente disgustoso !
Penso si tratti di un film medicale.
Pare sia stato girato in un ambulatorio. Si vede semplicemente l’incisione di una cisti mostruosa, o un brufolo o qualcosa del genere. Dal suo aspetto sembra una cisti sebacea.
Mi piace molto schiacciarmi i brufoli, pure alla mia età. Lo so che poi possono rimanere delle cicatrici, ma onestamente è difficile, soprattutto se le mani sono pulite, dopo la doccia e che i brufoli sono pronti a scoppiare.
Questa cosa nel video è il « più terribile brufolo che si sia mai visto ». L’apparecchio aspira sempre di più, sembra che il brufolo sia dotato di una produzione di sebo eterna. Proprio quando si comincia a sperare che il dottore stia finendo, quel dannato brufolo ressuscita e combatte di nuovo.
A tutti quelli che mi malediscono di aver pubblicato questa cazzata, il mio intento è di far progredire la scienza, ecco.

Un Bistouri Un Kyste

[wpvideo lPymBw0E]
This post has been translated into Italian as Un Bisturi Una Cisti (traduzione in italiano).
This is a French translation of the One Lance One Cyst video by Natalie of France, my finest translator. Enjoy.
Cette vidéo est vraiment dégoutante!
Je pense qu’il s’agit d’une vidéo médicale.
Il semble qu’elle ait été tournée dans un cabinet médical. Elle montre tout simplement l’incision d’un horrible kyste, bouton ou furoncle où quelque chose de ce genre. Vu son aspect on dirait un kyste sébacé.
J’aime beaucoup me presser les boutons, même à mon age (mûr). Je sais que ça peut laisser des cicatrices, mais honnêtement, c’est difficile, surtout si vos mains son propres, juste après une douche et que le boutons est prêt à exploser.
Cette chose dans la vidéo est « Le bouton le plus diabolique jamais créé ». L’appareil aspire encore et encore, cette chose semble un puits sans fond. Juste quand on pense que le docteur a réussi 0 terminer, ce satané bouton resurgit et livre le combat une fois de plus.
Pour tous ceux qui me maudissent d’avoir posté cette connerie, je tiens à vous faire savoir que je l’ai mise pour faire avancer la science, voilà.

Geographic Spread and Ethnic Origins of European Haplogroups

Geographic Spread and Ethnic Origins of European Haplogroups, on the very interesting Eupedia page.
From the About:

Eupedia.com was founded in December 2004.Our aim is to create a detailed and informative guide for countries of the European Union for travellers, expats and locals alike, with an emphasis on sightseeing, history, culture, economy, and life in Europe.

I figure that this page tells us something about the origins of the Caucasians, not to mention the origins of the Europeans. One thing that is incontrovertibly clear is that the Caucasian Race did not arise in Europe. Instead, it appears to have arisen in Southern Iran, the Caucasus and the Middle East, as I have speculated. So the Grandaddy of all the great European White Men was some towelheaded wog. Figures. Choke on that, White nationalists.
Going back even further, the Caucasians appear to have origins in Haplogroup N, which, a commenter on this blog has noted, seems to originate in Eastern Africa, especially around the area of the Masai in Kenya. This is also as I suspected, as I assume that the proto-Caucasians may have roots in the Masai, the Tutsi, the Southern Sudanese and other Desert Adopted Elongated African types. The Tutsi even have an uncanny, almost Caucasian appearance about them, despite their African purity (no Caucasian blood).
It also looks like any European clades go back no further than 13,000 years in Europe, and even at that time, I am told that Europeans looked more like Arabs than present day Aryan Supermen. This means that the vaunted White Race, like most exact races on Earth, is a relatively new creation, the latest model, as it were. Attempts to link present day Europeans to Paleolithic Europeans would appear to be absurd on their face.
If anyone other than White nationalist boneheads can make more sense of that page than this, go to it. It’s looks kind of mind-boggling from here.

How To Deal With the "Bleeding Menus" Problem in WordPress

If you use WordPress, you may have to deal with the “bleeding menus” issue. When you write a post, by default, the menus on the left hand side of the screen bleed over into the post, obstructing your view. In addition, on the Edit Posts page, they also bleed over into your post edit menu, obscuring stuff.
For 8 months, I just put up with it like a dumbass. Finally, one time I accidentally did something weird while writing a post and the menus folded back into a minimized position on the left hand side of the screen. It took me a bit of intrigued dumbassedness before I figured out how to unfold the menus.
When the menus are expanded, there will be a tiny arrow right above the Posts menu on the left. It looks like a tiny triple arrow pointing to the left at far left edge of the screen. Hover your mouse over that thing and watch the cursor turn into a horizontal arrow. Click on it and the menus fold back and don’t hang over the screen anymore.
Now that the menus are folded back, the arrow reappears, this time pointing to the right between the Polls and Appearance menus. Hover once again, watch the cursor turn into the arrow again, and click. Now the menus re-expand.

Damn Right We Are

And screw you if you don’t like it.
Baby Boomers Still Getting High, Agency Says.
I’m not sure when I last smoked pot.
I think it was less than a year ago though for sure. I started smoking it again, and it was one of the best things I’ve done lately. I have an anxiety disorder called Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD).
I don’t talk about it much on here because no one wants to hear about it, and this isn’t a “Crazy Blog.” Stigma is still an insanely (Joke!) huge issue, and I have enough problems as it is. Crazy Blogs are the ballooning number of sites where folks with mental dx’s (usually way worse than mine, like Manic-Depression, Major Depression, Borderline Personality Disorder, Asperger’s, Schizophrenia, etc.) mostly write about their mental stuff.
I take meds for OCD – an SSRI called Lexapro. I’ve gone off many times, but I relapse slowly but surely every time. Thing is, I started smoking pot again a few years back on a whim, and it worked great for OCD!
Unfortunately, folks like us have to deal with fools called “psychiatrists” and “psychologists” sometimes. Psychiatrists sometimes to get the meds. Psychologists for therapy, which I’ve had years of anyway and don’t really need anymore, as it doesn’t do that much for OCD, and I’ve already learned enough about myself and my life as I need to know.
This whole field, including all of the psychiatrists and psychologists, is insanely (Joke!) dead set against this thing called “drugs,” despite the fact that they shovel them out all the time as a way of getting their fat paychecks. Plus the dope that the psychs dish out is way worse in terms of side effects than any kind of cannabis.
One particularly annoying thing that these idiots do is the minute you meet some new psych-fool, and they learn you have both a dx and a drug history (even if deep in the past), they immediately make the extremely helpful suggestion that your dx was caused by getting high! Wow, thanks a lot! A dx that developed like 27 years ago, and I’m supposed to feel guilty for the rest of my life about causing it! I feel so much better now! I see why they call it the “helping professions!”
Even though in my case there seems to be zero evidence that this is the case. As an obsessive, I’ve thought this issue to death 50,000 times in multi-hour mental vicious circle sessions.
And drugs never really made it worse or better anyway in the past. Though sometimes coke would make OCD better, usually with plenty of booze too (I also did great creative writing on coke and lots of booze – great combo!) and one time when I was on LSD, I had 1-2 hours free of a particularly horrific obsessive thought that had locked into my brain 24-7, 365 for about a year or so. That was the only couple hours of peace I had had in that whole year. That’s why acid is evil, you know. Because it helps mental illnesses sometimes.
Anyway, if you admit to drinking at all (I drink two glasses of red wine a night) or taking any drugs other than the evil junk the p-docs write scripts for, you get shoveled out of all the programs immediately towards some bull called “Drug Treatment.” Yeah, that’s right, if you admit you take one hit off a jay once a year, you go to local equivalent of Betty Ford. Lame or what?
This is because recently the mental health idiots (not the people with the illnesses, they’re the smart ones), meaning the morons who “treat” us, decided to split “mental health” and “drug treatment.” Nowadays most of the former are dopers too, so this doesn’t make sense, but the whole motto nowadays is never the twain shall meet! So if you have any dx at all, even fulminant schizophrenia I guess, you get shunted to the Synanon clowns, and the mental guys won’t even talk to you until you get “drug treatmented.”
Only then you go into mental health, but only if you get “clean.” What if you never go clean and keep using? I guess mental health says go away until you come clean. This is based on the somewhat lame idea that you can’t treat anyone with a psych dx as long as they are “using.” There’s no evidence that this is true as a general statement, and in a lot of cases, it’s just stupid.
The local medical treatment folks are much the same. I use a public facility, so this may be the problem, but I bet privates are just as insane (Joke!). If you tell them you are smoking weed, even for good reason (like it’s medicine, duh) they freak out and remand you to “therapy.” Then you go to the Therapist Lady who knows little about dope and less about medicine, and she tries to force you to quit smoking dope.
Mind you, this is in California, where cannabis is legal to use medically as long as you have a card! I can imagine what things are like in South Carolina.
Unfortunately, this anti-drug societal meme, which is profound even here in the middle of a California barrio, has taken a hold of me lately, and I even haven’t been stoned in a while.
I take exception to the standard crap line about drugs. I’m extremely happy that we Boomers are continuing to get high. The typical line is that drugs are evil life destroyers, and everyone who takes them is an evil scum to be avoided and shunned.
In terms of my life experience, my position is that drugs are fun. Drugs are a blast. Drugs are oodles and oodles of kicks and endless good times. That’s been my experience. I never got addicted or totally messed up on dope like it seems every other user did. I’ve been using off and on for 35 years now, and I’m not any the worse for it.
That’s because I was always just a recreational user. Everyone I tell this to is like, “No way! What’s that? No such thing as a recreational user!” This is because, you see, all users are either very casual experimenters or addicts and screwups with a life-wrecking problem.
But really. The only drug I ever used regularly was pot, and even if you use it daily, it usually doesn’t screw you up that much.
I used coke for 13 years and never got addicted. I did probably less than an ounce of coke in 13 years, maybe a gram or so a year. I’d just tickle my nose now and then.
I only did speed 3 times, and I never got into heroin, although I admit to very much a liking for codeine these days, which is killer good for OCD too for some weird reason.
I did hallucinogens for 14 years (40 times overall). These drugs actually act against addiction in that they are so overwhelming that it’s almost impossible to take them regularly. I took psychedelics maybe 3-4 times a year, never had a serious bad trip, and I don’t think I have any serious consequences from it other than really bright lit up colors sometimes, which I think is HPPD.
I’ve known many folks who took LSD anywhere from 1-700 times, and I can’t say I’ve ever met one person who was messed up from taking the stuff. I’ve known folks who have been using pot daily for 20-30 years, and they are psychologically normal in every way, shape and form. Those that were not, I saw them quit pot, and in general, they didn’t get any healthier psychologically. Sometimes they even started back up again, and still not much changed. I concluded that pot in general doesn’t seem to have much to do with psychological issues one way or the other.
The notion of the permafried pothead or former acid user is largely a myth as far as I can tell, or at least it’s uncommon. Most of the really psychologically messed up folks I’ve met weren’t using anything. I always thought maybe they could have used some weed to mellow them out a bit.
Oh yeah, one more really evil thing pot does to me. Sometimes it makes me laugh. For hours and hours, off and on. And, even after the high wears off, it still makes me laugh, even for days afterwards, even out in public (where I do try to suppress my giggles). I don’t care if people think I’m nuts for laughing in public. The sane people will just figure I’m thinking of something funny, which is exactly why I’m laughing.
So you see, that’s one more reason cannabis is so evil. It makes people laugh, sometimes on and off for hours and days on end. We can’t have any of that now, can we?

New Site Record on Robert Lindsay August 22

A new record for 4th highest hits in a day was set on this site yesterday, August 22, when 3,560 hits were recorded, breaking the previous record set on July 27 of 3,498 hits.
Many of the hits were coming in for Four Animals One Grinder, a video about the charming, kind, gentle and sensitive goings-on in your local rendering plant.
Alpha Unit’s On the Selfishness of Jews also recorded a lot of hits, probably the most ever recorded on any Alpha Unit post. That’s probably because her post was like an Anti-Semite Venus Fly-Trap designed to snare the local anti-Semites who stalk about the netherregions of the comments section.

More On Hinduism, Race, Caste and the "Aryan Invasion"

The comment below is from an Indian poster on this popular post. I agree with most of what he says. First of all, I don’t think that the Aryans pushed the Dravidians to the South. There are Dravidian types and mixed types all over North India.
Points 2 and 3 are self-evident.
I have always felt that Hinduism was nothing more than the ancient religion of India, and there is good evidence for this. Clearly it predates the Aryans. It’s not necessarily as old as India, since India is as old as dirt, but clearly it goes back so far that we can hardly even say when it begins.
Ancient Iran also had a caste system, and so did their ancient religion. Yazidism, one of the oldest major religions known to man, possibly dating back 10,000 years, has caste and origins in Iran. The suggestion is that caste is a regional phenomenon across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Iran and Northern Iraq. Afghanistan lacks caste, but until the Communist revolution was a semi-feudal society.
The fact remains that Aryan languages displaced Dravidian languages to the South, and all of North India is Aryan-speaking in general, and the people of the North are lighter than the people of the South, and this needs to be explained somehow. Obviously, prior to the Aryan Invasion, Dravidian languages were spoken all over North India. Either their speakers dropped Dravidian in favor of Indo-Iranian or they moved south. Possibly both of these occurred.

1) Vedas are not everything in Hinduism, though they form some of the core. There are many books written in ancient mathematics and science in the post-Vedic period which are as relevant to the history of Hindus, if not more than the Vedas. Look at the books written by Bhaskara (there were two Bhaskaras recorded in history), Aryabhatta, Apastamba, Baudhayana, Varahmihira and several other authors.
Some of them have had their base south of the Vindhyas, which indicates the migration of the culture of the Vedic people southward. I am guessing the actual migration of Vedic people might also have taken place either before or after the completion of the writing of the Vedas (500-1000 BCE). Read about the myth of Agastya and his followers and the Vindhyas.
2) Skin color depends on the climate and gradually over generations (maynot be 3 but lets say about 30 generations) it is sure to change.
3) People speaking different languages derived from a root language (or speaking the root language itself) need not share genetic origins or race. For example, I am an Indian, and if I speak or write in English, a European-originated language, that does not make me European. I bet the same applies to speakers of Indo-European languages.
4) Based on several references in the Vedas against dark-skinned tribes, one cannot assume that all the scriptures of the Hindus (the Sruti and Smriti) were written by the highly-advanced fair-skinned race-preserving cohort known as Aryans who came down from central Asia and pushed the locals down south.
One severe contradiction to this simplistic theory is how come there are references of lower-caste tribals getting upgraded to the higher caste of Brahmins (like Valmiki, Vishwamitra) in the epics written by these same racially-finicky people (the Aryans) that was allowed to be published without censorship. The racial references in the Vedas are at best ambiguous. If the Aryans were the vanguards of Hinduism and they were the creators of the scriptures, how did dark-skinned gods like Vishnu and Shiva find their ways into the texts.
More likely they should have been shown as demons given the benchmarks by which they would have decided. Given all these, there surely exists a possibility of a fair-skinned race coming down from Afghanistan or central Asia and contributing to the creation of Hindu scriptures and merging with the locals, in fact there could be several races of this type migrating in at different points of time. But to say that they did this at the expense of a dark-skinned race or an indigenous race is pure baloney, given the facts.
In fact the genesis of Hindu scriptures could have come from different parts (including the non-Indo-European parts which may include Sanskrit speakers of Dravidian origin) of the Indian subcontinent. Likewise, tribes that had originally entered from the northern borders of India (one of them being the Aryans) must have migrated all over the country giving an inseparable and indistinguishable genetic mixture that we know as the people of India today.
Also the caste system in ancient India up to a period must have been rather fluid and based more on occupation than ancestry as is the popular notion. Hinduism (at least the history and references from Hinduism) seems to have a much greater tolerance for skin color and caste than is touted to be.

PC Lunacy on Immigration and Other Things

The quote at the end of the post is from a middle class Black commenter who took tremendous offense at this rather moderate post, accusing it of sounding like the neo-Nazis on Stormfront. He also took issue with my description of this site as anti-racist (In my opinion, it is, and that is one of the foundational themes of this site), and said instead it was a racist site.
He has now been banned because you don’t get to call this a racist site, and if you come here and spout PC anti-racism at me, I will soon tire of you and ban you. So this fellow was banned.
He objected to many things in the post. One objection is that a Black state in the US would not be a miserable failure. I’m quite sure it would be a disaster, and that is why you hardly see any Blacks crazy enough to advocate for this. In particular, he objected to my saying that all of the Blacks in the US could take off tomorrow, while it would be painful in some respects in that we would lose a lot of quality workers and citizens, I’m confident that on balance, Whites would be better off.
Obviously, professional sports would be hit very hard, but White men have been shooting hoops, throwing footballs and catching fly balls for a long time now, and I’m sure they could go back to it. Baseball’s practically a Caribbean Latino sport now anyway. We no longer need Blacks for cheap labor, as we’ve imported millions of illegals to do that.
The crime rate would obviously plummet, many of our ruined cities would become quite a bit more livable again, music and other entertainment would become less obviously sociopathic, many of our social pathologies would ameliorate, and perhaps most significantly, we would be free of a lot of racial friction generated by a perpetually grievanced group (Blacks) that many Whites are getting increasingly tired of.
Granted, since the 1960’s, Blacks have resembled a bunch of angry people locked out of a really cool party hanging out on the sidewalk and yelling that they want in. Inside, we Whites are partying it up. Whenever you see a scene like that, you know how painful and ugly it is.
Well, Obama got elected, and to me that meant that Blacks finally got invited into the party after all this time. Instead of being grateful or happy, they seem just as pissed off as ever. They’re inside the party now, and everyone is having fun, but they still act like they are out on the sidewalk.
Many Whites, including me, are exasperated. There is a sense of, “What more do we need to do, anyway, before you all settle down, relax and try to be happy?” What I am saying is that the culture of grievance gets old. US Blacks are the richest, the best educated, the most politically powerful, the most intelligent and the most cultured Blacks on Earth. Despite the ghettos and all, they live quite well here compared to just about any Black or heavily-Black country.
Sure, you can find some other White countries that are maybe better for Blacks, but once again, you come back around to the original argument that White cities, regions and states are great places for Blacks to live in. Blacks agree. They vote with their feet. Once a city gets too Black, the most functional Blacks start taking off too, usually to a Whiter area.
I’m not a White nationalist or a Back to Africa idiot or any of that. I just note that Whites do not particularly need Blacks in the US, while the converse does not seem to be true. Blacks need Whites. If all the Whites left tomorrow, this country would rapidly turn into the usual Black and mestizo Latin American type country. It would not be a better place for Blacks.
So I’m not making any argument for ethnic cleansing or saying Blacks don’t have a right to be here.
But this is why quite a few Whites are enthusiastic about a White ethnostate in the US, while almost no Blacks are keen on the idea of a Black ethnostate.
Whites look at the White ethnostate with no Blacks and ask, “OK, why is this a problem?”
Blacks look at a Black state with no Whites and probably think, “Uh-oh. Detroit. Black Belt. Count me out.”
Blacks benefit in the present integrated system to some extent in that Blacks in the US are fairly spread out and diluted and further that many of the victims of Black criminals are non-Blacks.
In a Black ethnostate, all of the Black criminals would be concentrated together, and there would be no non-Black victims to dilute the victimhood. Blacks would be seriously hammered by Black criminals in a Black ethnostate as Black criminals turned all of their antisocial fury on the only victims available, other Blacks.
Anyway, all the above is surely insulting for a lot of Blacks to think about, so they are going to be pretty defensive about it.
On immigration, this guy spouted the standard PC line, which is quite common nowadays. You hear it across the board by the entire US elite. Immigrant advocates are also parroting this nonsense. It’s interesting that the modern version of Political Correctness is really Marxism stripped of class analysis and focusing solely on race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and other nonsense.
Many of the folks pushing this Leftist line on race are in fact marrying it to explicitly free market economics and reject anything smacking of a Left view of economics, at least according to a friend of mine who is currently taking a syllabus called “Multiculturalism” – mandatory at California state universities now! He calls it “Anti-White Studies.”
Considering the Cultural Leftism these folks were pushing, I assumed that they were liberals or even Leftists. But this Cultural Marxism, according to my friend, is married to an embrace of “the free market” and a rejection of most to all government intervention and regulation of economies.
This really is the same pro-corporate globalism that is being pushed by the corporations. Our modern corporations feature, along with diversity advisers, multicultural seminars and crazy hate speech and anti-harassment codes, the standard conservative pro-corporate economics.
So Political Correctness often nowadays is a bizarre mix of the worst – Right neoliberal madness of the kind that is blowing up our economy mixed with brain-dead stupid and White-toxic Leftist Cultural Marxism.
There’s nothing in this for any principled progressive White person. Economically, it’s just conservative gunpowder and matches. The only Left part of it is objectively hostile to Whites and frankly working class folks of all races, as it demands that White nations be flooded with the entirety of the Third World in the name of redress for supposed White crimes and evils.
So working Whites get the double-whammy. First we get hit by the Rightist Hurricane Neoliberal side of this template. Next we get hit by Leftist toxic anti-White hate propaganda combined with a tsunami of Third World non-White immigrants driving wages into the gutter and turning once-livable cities into Third World hellholes. There’s nothing here for us.
Check out this standard PC line on why mass Third World immigration is necessary for all White countries:

Some Whites will always talk about how we don’t “need” these non-Whites and such and such, but the fact is, if they weren’t needed, they wouldn’t be there in the first place. First off, White countries don’t even reproduce at replacement level, thereby making it imperative to have to bring in non-White immigrants just to keep their rapidly-aging societies from having a labor shortage and to be able to support the social security benefits of Whites retired and soon to be retired.
The situation is even more accelerated in Europe with it’s even lower white birthrate than in America. So go ahead and cut off the spigot of non-White immigration, and the White countries will eventually vanish off the face the planet based on their low birthrates alone.
You ought to be thankful there are non-White workers coming in to make up the slack for your low-fertility rates. I guess next someone will be blaming Blacks for white low fertility rate since you know, Blacks are responsible for everything bad in the universe.

Does anyone reading this blog actually believe this tripe? Yet this is what passes for standard and unquestioned wisdom by the PC Mafia and entire right to left political spectrum of US elites.

Great Pro-Choice Site

In these times when the pro-choice movement seems to be more at risk than in decades, it’s heartening to see a pro-choice website that is as large and active as Rh Reality Check. It covers not only pro-choice views, but also contraception, sex education, sexual health and just sex news in general.
It has a great attitude. All the writers are women, many of them young women, and many are Black, Hispanic or Asian.
The pro-choice movement really needs a shot in the arm nowadays, as its been under withering assault since the rightwing backlash started under Reagan in 1980. We have almost 30 years of rightwing blowback, and maybe the winds are finally shifting.
Taking the race of the anti-abortion folks into consideration, I would say that most of the anti-abortion folks are Whites, usually conservative Whites. I find it fascinating that almost all White nationalists and other racist Whites really hate abortion. Do they realize how many more Blacks and Hispanics would be born if there were no abortion, since Hispanics and especially Blacks have far more abortions proportionately than Whites?
Blacks, despite their religiosity, seem to be pro-choice, and Black women are more likely than non-Blacks to have abortions. Latinas are more likely to have abortions than non-Latinas, I believe that by the second generation or so, they are about as pro-choice as anyone, both unusual facts considering their Catholicism. In fact, Catholic women in general are more likely to have abortions than non-Catholics, which implies that a lot of Catholics think the Church is full of shit.
And most of the anti-abortion folks are coming from a religious point of view, which is interesting since neither the Bible nor Jesus deal with the issue at all. All it is says is, “Thou shalt not kill.”
But we kill all the time, in justified homicide by cops and folks defending themselves, in wars; Hell, nothing kills like capitalism itself. The US government has been funding and/or committing mass murder for a long time now. It’s called imperialism. We fund and advise death squads in the Third World and shower military aid on the most murderous fascist regimes. Then, every now and then, we start a war ourselves and slaughter lots of folks. We started a Nazi-like war of aggression in Iraq which has resulted in over 1 million deaths.
It’s also interesting that the anti-abortion idiots seem to love fetuses so much, but they don’t seem to give a fuck about kids as soon they done get themselves borned.
The fact that the anti-abortion crowd is coming from a usually fundamentalist religious point of view implies that their position is irrational. It can’t be justified by philosophical traditions outside of some Holy Book. Religion is fine, but we have separation of Church and State here, and religion is not supposed to guide public policy.
Even the Catholic Church itself allowed abortion until the time of “quickening” up until about the 17th Century. The opposition to it in toto is simply a Papal Canonical matter that is not necessarily consonant even with Catholic theology. Islam tends to take a pretty hands-off position to abortion, although the fundamentalists hate it.
Anti-abortion views are associated with fundamentalism, backwardness, obscurantism and in particular, anti-woman politics all over the world. Pro-choice societies are more scientific, rational, humane, modern and especially pro-woman than those who are not.
Buddhism and Hinduism don’t appear to take a stand on abortion.
I admit to being queasy about late term abortion, but if the life or the health (Not the mental health!) of the mother is truly or at risk, it’s reasonable. However, I don’t approve it in other circumstances, and using abortion as birth control, which I am convinced some of my female acquaintances have done, makes me ill. It’s still killing, not of a life, but of a potential life, and that is not a breezy matter.

Four Animals One Grinder

I decided to move this video over to the video site. Find it here.
Välkommen svenska läsare! Detta inlägg är nu tillgänglig på svenska. Klicka här för den svenska versionen. Jag älskar Sverige!
I am looking for translators to translate this post into Polish and Dutch. Email me if you are interested.
Warning: Rare adverse reactions to this video, including vomiting, have been recorded. Please take appropriate precautions before watching the video.
The first animal is a cow, the second one is a pig, the third another cow and the last a horse.
I can’t believe this video. It isn’t really horrible or evil. It’s kind of gross, but hey that’s life, man. Mostly it’s just incredible. It just shows what goes on at a rendering plant. Whole dead farm animals are fed into the rendering machine via lifter and then ground up by this unbelievable machine, bones, heads, hooves and all.
A lot of posts on the Net are saying that these cows are alive. It’s not true. They just appear to be alive since once the grinder starts, they start moving around a lot due to the incredible force of the thing.
Another common misconception is that these animals are being ground up for human food like hot dogs.
That’s not true.
These are dead animals that died on farms somewhere so they are not really fit for consumption. The result might goes into, among other things, animal feed (especially for chickens) or pet food, and that’s not a pleasant thought (this is how Mad Cow Disease is being caused). The thought that this goes into pet food also bothers me. If it’s true, that does it. I’m never going to eat dog food again.
Usually the rendered dead animals are turned into fertilizer, which is a harmless use of them. They also turned into yellow (non-vegetable) oil. That’s used as grease for machinery. They also make soap out of this ground up Mr. Ed Puree.
People don’t realize that animals die all the time on farms, especially on modern factory farms. What people never think about is, how do you get rid of dead horses, cows and pigs? You can’t exactly drag them to the curb and leave them there for the garbageman. And it’s kind of hard to bury them in a hole. We don’t have animal graveyards for cows and horses, and incinerators don’t accept them.
This is where the rendering plant comes in. You sell the dead animal to the rendering plant, and they come and pick it up for you. They take it back to the plant and grind it up for Mulch N Grow or whatever. One problem with these rendering plants is that the smell emanating from them is truly horrendous, as people who live near them attest.
The guy driving that lift must have one of the country’s nastiest jobs. Can you imagine being the guy who has to clean the grinder out? If you look at that thing, it’s a horrible mess.
At the end of the video the lift tosses a horse in, and watching that sucker get ground up is incredible. One thing that blew me away was the sound of this crushing machine as it ground up bones and skulls. Wow!
There’s a particularly nasty segment at the second cow (2:11 in the video) segment where the thing lets out this massive spurt as it’s being crunched up. That means that that dead cow had been decaying for a while and was getting bloated as dead animals tend to do. That’s another reason why this meat is not fit for consumption by humans.
This video has been up for a few years, but it just started to go viral around mid-August 2009.
Isn’t it incredible the stuff that we can see on the Interwebs? Before Al Gore invented the Internets, how many of us ever saw a rendering plant in action?
The company that makes this sucker is out of Denmark. Just think of the tech that went into this machine. This thing is called the PB 30/60 Crusher.
A few thoughts:
Wouldn’t this be a great death penalty machine? Screw this lethal injection crap. 1st degree murder? I sentence you to the Grinder! We could sell tickets for large amounts of money for spectators to watch the killers get ground up alive and use the proceeds to help fund the state so the state can spend the money to help people.
Damn I want one of these machines! Where can I buy one? I’d use it on some of my enemies. I would tie them up, throw them in the loader and dump them in the Grinder. Then I would charge like $1,000/head for spectators to watch, get rich and retire on the proceeds.
We should use this thing on dead humans to grind them up. That way we could save lots of graveyard space and use the future would-be graveyard space to build strip malls and Walmarts and other useful things.
Actually, I think when I die, I want to be ground up like this. We could make it like a funeral thing and all of the funeral guests could come watch me get ground up and eat popcorn and stuff. It would be a great end to my life.
After I get ground up, I would like to be canned as Robert Lindsay Chow and fed to my pet cats, assuming that I have any. If I don’t have any cats, I would ask to be made into cat food, because I love cats, and this way, cats could feast on someone who really loves them. Cats have given me so much love in my life, this would be my special way of giving back!
They should have had some really brutal death metal music playing in the background of this video, don’t you think?
Wouldn’t it be cool to see a dead elephant or giraffe get thrown in that thing, just for fun?
In my dream world, there would be like 600 channels on cable. One of them should be the Animal Shredder Channel. That channel would show nothing but this machine grinding animals all day. To make it more interesting, they could vary the types of animals getting ground up. I would just turn it on and leave it on for hours at a time while I do my work and whatnot, just like background you know. Except I would probably change the channel when I was eating.
There are a lot of possibilities for alternate uses for this machine.
We could take some fat White kid raised by a single Mom on Twinkies and video games and stick him underneath the machine. The meat from the ground up farm animals would fall all around him and all over him. It would land on his face, covering him.
We would have workers with shovels to shovel the meat off of him so he wouldn’t get buried. He would keep his mouth open, and some of the meat would fall in. Then he would eat it. We would keep him under there, and he would get fatter and fatter. After about 10 years of that, he would be so fat that he could become the King of Germany.
We could take the ground up animals and give them to Disney. Disney could reconstitute them into humans, especially teen idols like Selena, Miley and Britney. Little would their swooning fans realize that their favorite teen star was really a ground up horse!
We could use the machine to try to solve intractable conflicts. By grinding up pigs and cows both and making movies of it and distributing it to conflict zones, possibly we could make headway in the Hindu-Muslim conflict in Kashmir.
The possibilities are endless!
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

Spot the Language 21

Here we go again for another round of Spot the Language! Yay!
Identify the language by its English name. Some of my readers are quite slow, I am very sympathetic to slow people, so I decided to put them in alphabetical order to make things more fair for those who tend to plod a bit mentally.
All languages but three are Indo-European. The other three are Afro-Asiatic, Kartvelian and Eskimo-Aleut. All are spoken in the general area of Europe and its nearby environs. At the very least, all languages but one are spoken in Europe, or at least the area bordered by the Mediterranean and Black Seas. Two others are spoken in the Americas. These two are spoken in either former or current European colonies. Five of the languages are spoken in the UK alone.
Some of these are small languages, but they are all pretty well-known.
1. Հայերեն
2. Euskara
3. Tamazight
4. Brezhoneg
5. Føroyskt
6. Frysk
7. Furlan
8. Gàidhlig
9. ქართული
10. Kalaallisut
11. Kreyòl Ayisyen
12. Magyar
13. Gaeilge
14. كوردي
15. Gaelg
16. Româneşte
17. Scoats
18. Cymraeg

"The Selfishness of Jews," by Alpha Unit

New post by guest poster Alpha Unit. Great stuff!
In 1919 a group of Black and White business and academic leaders created a very special Commission on Interracial Cooperation, designed in response to what was happening in the South after the First World War. Black war veterans returning to the South were being told to resume their “place.” The tension created by this demand was leading to violence, and the Commission was formed to quell this violence.
There is no evidence of widespread White hostility to this Commission. Perhaps it’s because there were well-respected Southern White men at the helm.
“You see?” someone might be tempted to say. “There was a proper way to approach these problems in the South. Things that go through the proper channels have a greater chance of success.”
This seems agreeable enough. Lowering the number of lynchings that Whites carried out seemed like a decent goal. How threatening could this really be?
What was far more threatening to Southern Whites was the radical notion that a Black man should be treated as the equal of a White man. That a Black man was entitled to the same Constitutional rights as any White man. This was no mere appeal to decency; this meant changing the law.
Anyone pushing this idea was a bona fide enemy.
That meant Jews.
Jewish-led organizations, represented by Jewish attorneys and activists, got right in the face of White Southerners and said, in effect, “What you’re doing is wrong. And we’re going to do everything in our power to stop you.”
Such loving kindness and selflessness for their fellow human beings, right?
I’m familiar with the accusations made against Jewish civil rights activists. The gist of these accusations is that Jews only involved themselves in Black civil rights for Jewish benefit. That it was self-interest that motivated them, not any genuine concern for the plight of Blacks.
Well, so be it. Jewish self-interest it is.
During the height of the Jim Crow era in the South, it was Jewish self-interest that brought about Powell v. Alabama, a Supreme Court decision establishing that it wasn’t enough in this country that a defendant be represented by counsel; he had to be represented by competent counsel.
It was Jewish self-interest that brought about Norris v. Alabama, which decreed that a state could not exclude a person from a jury solely because of his race.
Jewish self-interest resulted in Herndon v. Lowry, wherein the Supreme Court ruled that a state cannot suppress so-called “revolutionary” speech in and of itself; it had to prove a direct connection between such speech and an actual attempt to overthrow the government.
I could go on and on citing cases involving Jewish self-interest.
I know that Jewish participation in the Civil Rights Movement incenses some people. But the same people who cannot stomach Jewish involvement in civil rights aren’t able to muster the slightest disquiet about some of the abuses these Jews were addressing. They don’t seem to express much concern over the fact that there were Americans in the South who were being denied their rights.
These weren’t foreigners or illegal immigrants. They were natural born citizens, and one Southern state after another had decided that these people didn’t really need the protections the Constitution had guaranteed them. It was White self-interest at its best.
Why doesn’t that bother these people?