Spot the Language 26

Rules: Identify the language, that is, say something intelligent about it. Possibilities include where it is spoken, what race or ethnicity the speakers are, whether the language is extinct or extant and what shape the language is in, to what general or specific language families the language belongs, and anything else intelligent you can think of about the language etc. You’re not supposed to look it up; anyone can do that. You’re supposed to do it off the top of your head, ideally.

1. Ladin
2. Ladino
3. Ladakhi
4. Lezgian
5. Lingala
6. Livonian
7. Luganda
8. Lycian
9. Maithili
10. Manchu
11. Mandinga
12. Manipuri
13. Manx
14. Mapuche
15. Marathi
16. Mbala
17. Mende
18. Micmac
19. Milanese
20. Mojave

Spot the Language 25

Rules: Identify the language, that is, say something intelligent about it. Possibilities include where it is spoken, what race or ethnicity the speakers are, whether the language is extinct or extant and what shape the language is in, to what general or specific language families the language belongs, and anything else intelligent you can think of about the language etc. You’re not supposed to look it up; anyone can do that. You’re supposed to do it off the top of your head, ideally.

1. Guarani
2. Gujarati
3. Gurkhali
4. Hausa
5. Herero
6. Hindustani
7. Igbo
8. Ilocano
9. Ingush
10. Isan
11. Javanese
12. Kabiye
13. Kannada
14. Karen
15. Ket
16. Kikongo
17. Kikuyu
18. Kinyarwanda
19. Konkani
20. Kapelle

Spot the Language 24

Rules: Identify the language, that is, say something intelligent about it. Possibilities include where it is spoken, what race or ethnicity the speakers are, whether the language is extinct or extant and what shape the language is in, to what general or specific language families the language belongs, and anything else intelligent you can think of about the language etc. You’re not supposed to look it up; anyone can do that. You’re supposed to do it off the top of your head, ideally.

1. Chichewa
2. Chukchi
3. Chuvash
4. Coptic
5. Cree
6. Creek
7. Dari
8. Diegueno
9. Dzongka
10. Enets
11. Etruscan
12. Evenki
13. Ewe
14. Faroese
15. Fon
16. Frisian
17. Friulian
18. Fulfulde
19. Gabrielino
20. Galician

Spot the Language 23

Rules: Identify the language, that is, say something intelligent about it. Possibilities include where it is spoken, what race or ethnicity the speakers are, whether the language is extinct or extant and what shape the language is in, to what general or specific language families the language belongs, and anything else intelligent you can think of about the language etc. You’re not supposed to look it up; anyone can do that. You’re supposed to do it off the top of your head, ideally.

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

"Life's Not Fair," by Alpha Unit

New Alpha Unit post. This one is pretty nice; I like it.
People have asked me what she’s doing here. I met her on Abagond’s blog and we started emailing. It was contentious at first, but then she calmed down. Mostly, she could not understand me, but hardly anyone does. I told her that she wrote well and invited her to the site. Actually, I’ve invited a number of people of both genders and various races, but most don’t take me up. I have high standards here, but she was good enough.
She was flattered. She’s a college grad with an English major and a frustrated writer like millions are. She’d never been published anywhere. I encouraged her, because at first she was insecure like a lot of writers are.
She agrees with me about a lot of things. Also, she boosts my anti-racist credentials. This blog was turning into a racist blog, if you just looked at the commenters. That’s not what I’m about, and I wanted to steer it back in a more appropriate direction. AU has been good for that.
It’s not fair.
It just isn’t fair that men throughout history have always had more power and authority than women. Women are wonderful, capable people, and it’s not right that men should have so many advantages over those weaker than themselves.
It just isn’t fair the way some groups compete with and prevail over other groups. The way some nations conquer other nations. The way empires arise and subsume weak nations. It isn’t fair the way states lie and connive to achieve their will over other states, or the way states insist on the “rule of law” for their enemies while completely ignoring the same “rule” when it suits their own purposes.
It just isn’t fair the way people judge other people not on their true character but on who their ancestors were, what their ancestors did, what they look like, what people who look like them do, or what people are afraid they might do.
It just isn’t fair to find yourself in a situation you really cannot stand and to realize that there isn’t a damned thing you can do about it. And there isn’t a group on this earth that hasn’t at least once found itself in that predicament. Not one.
Sometimes you realize that there is something you can do about it. And you act. And you prevail.
But in your victory lie the seeds of future grief. Those you have prevailed against are not going to forget. They are not going to let go. They’re not going to “move on,” “get past it,” or “stop whining.” No group ever does.
An individual, on the other hand, has the freedom that a group does not.

“Life’s Not Fair,” by Alpha Unit

New Alpha Unit post. This one is pretty nice; I like it.

People have asked me what she’s doing here. I met her on Abagond’s blog and we started emailing. It was contentious at first, but then she calmed down. Mostly, she could not understand me, but hardly anyone does. I told her that she wrote well and invited her to the site. Actually, I’ve invited a number of people of both genders and various races, but most don’t take me up. I have high standards here, but she was good enough.

She was flattered. She’s a college grad with an English major and a frustrated writer like millions are. She’d never been published anywhere. I encouraged her, because at first she was insecure like a lot of writers are.

She agrees with me about a lot of things. Also, she boosts my anti-racist credentials. This blog was turning into a racist blog, if you just looked at the commenters. That’s not what I’m about, and I wanted to steer it back in a more appropriate direction. AU has been good for that.

It’s not fair.

It just isn’t fair that men throughout history have always had more power and authority than women. Women are wonderful, capable people, and it’s not right that men should have so many advantages over those weaker than themselves.

It just isn’t fair the way some groups compete with and prevail over other groups. The way some nations conquer other nations. The way empires arise and subsume weak nations. It isn’t fair the way states lie and connive to achieve their will over other states, or the way states insist on the “rule of law” for their enemies while completely ignoring the same “rule” when it suits their own purposes.

It just isn’t fair the way people judge other people not on their true character but on who their ancestors were, what their ancestors did, what they look like, what people who look like them do, or what people are afraid they might do.

It just isn’t fair to find yourself in a situation you really cannot stand and to realize that there isn’t a damned thing you can do about it. And there isn’t a group on this earth that hasn’t at least once found itself in that predicament. Not one.

Sometimes you realize that there is something you can do about it. And you act. And you prevail.

But in your victory lie the seeds of future grief. Those you have prevailed against are not going to forget. They are not going to let go. They’re not going to “move on,” “get past it,” or “stop whining.” No group ever does.

An individual, on the other hand, has the freedom that a group does not.

Sexmaniacman On Seduction

Sexmaniacman just told me the following:

Hey Bob, a woman just told me that I have a take it or leave it attitude. I was interested, but obviously, I said, “Yeah, so what?” Then she said, “See? That was take it or leave it right there.” I said, “Sure, I know. So what.” Then she said that was what she loved about me (this take it or leave it attitude that she says she actually dislikes), and then mentioned how she wants to have sex with me.

For some reason, I thought, “Ho-hum, she wants to have sex with me, yawn.” And I like this woman. But this “I can take it or leave it” attitude towards sex feels really liberating. Make them work for it. I’m a privileged catch and you have to work to get me. I think women really despise guys who crawl all around trying to kiss up to them and accommodate them.

I never realized I had such a dicky attitude, but I think it’s the best. On the other hand, you should also try to be accommodating to others to some extent, and I do.

I’m reading this guy’s blog here, which is all about picking up chicks. It’s for young guys in their 20’s who are upper middle class yuppies. Everyone else needn’t bother to read.

I disagree with some of the stuff he says, but he does have some good points.

He says never complain about a lousy kiss from a woman. I disagree. You go to kiss a woman at the end of the date and she turns her cheek and lets you peck her cheek. Lean back and say, “Wow,” real sarcastically.

Most of the time, that will get her back up and she’ll start kissing you for real. If that doesn’t work, make fun of her. Say, “You call that a kiss? Where’d you learn how to kiss? You don’t even know how to kiss.” But say it humorously, not angrily.

Women actually like to be provoked. It works pretty good to suggest they can’t kiss worth a crap or they are probably frigid and lousy in bed. That’s a direct challenge, and a lot of the time, they will respond to it by showing you, “Damn right I know how to kiss/fuck, etc, baby!”

The mistakes he is talking about are guys who don’t know how to read women. You have to read women. You need to be an expert in verbal and nonverbal communication. I’m still learning this stuff every day, and I figure it’s a Lifetime Course. I can’t emphasize this strongly enough, because you really do need to learn this stuff in order to deal with women.

Here the guy asks his date to kiss him. I’ve always thought that’s the stupidest thing in the world to do. Never ask a new woman if she wants to have any kind of sex act. Don’t even ask your girlfriend if she wants to have sex. Let her ask you or take the initiative.

I’ve always just been a Rapist and an Attacker. I just grab at them or needle them with my feet or make rude sexual remarks. I always make a big joke out of it and I’m laughing and screwing around the whole time.

It’s hit or miss that way, but I’ve had sex with scores of women. The only new woman you should ask if she wants to have sex with you is a whore. Any other female is probably going to say no, and they don’t get better as they get older.

Generally, you have to wait until you get the proper signals that it’s ok to assault her. You might have to wait a while. The signals might never come, in which case you probably don’t assault her. Just figure she’s a lost cause and don’t date her anymore.

If you try to assault her and she pushes you away or threatens to call the cops (Yes, it’s happened to me) just shrug your shoulders, forget about her, and then act mildly put out the rest of the night. She’ll feel bad and try to make up for it. Act like, “Gimme one reason why I should date you again?” Not angry or anything, just “take it or leave it.”

Assault can be very soft, slow-motion and tender, like a movie that’s in slow motion, or you can just push her up against the wall and kiss her really hard. I’ve done both many, many times, and I do recommend this approach.

Bob, I remember one time I was out with this rock band. I was trying to screw the lead singer, whose name was Ann.

I won’t give you the name of the band because there were sort of big around LA for awhile (she’s still kind of famous and there are pics of her on the Net)and this might get back to me.

I just Googled her and it turns out that later she went solo and formed her own band and released some albums. She also played with some of the big LA punk bands. You can order her records on Amazon and some other places. She’s still performing up til 1989, then she’s gone.

There was another woman there, Linda, and I’d already had sex with her, but now we were sort of through. I think Linda and Ann were having sex at some point.

They were all a bunch of goth rockers and I was a punker with a leather jacket and an attitude. The goth guys were mostly fags or bi or might as well have been. If you were good looking, confident, cocky and didn’t act like a total queer, you could clean up with the goth chicks, who were mostly bi themselves, by the way.

You just had to play this role of arrogant, old-fashioned guy disgusted by all the rampant homo/bi-sexuality in the scene. The chicks all thought that mean and horrible and disgusting, but then they wanted to have sex with you too, because you know, you were really the only real man around.

I was in the back seat in a car full of this punk band’s members, and I kept reaching up in front and grabbing Ann. She was reaching back and we were playing games with fingers and grabbing or some shit.

Everyone else was talking and watching us like, “What are they doing, anyway?” I was partly doing this to piss off Linda, and she didn’t like it too much. But she wasn’t putting out anymore anyway, so I was a free man, and she needed to avert her eyes and shut up.

We were walking into this Denny’s at like 2 AM and I finally realized how pissed I was at Ann. She’d been teasing me like this for way too long. As we walked into the doorway, I suddenly grabbed her and shoved her up against the wall and kissed her real hard. Then, just as quickly, I let her go and smiled like nothing had happened.

The whole party (the band members) was like, “Whoa!”

Linda asked with a weird smile, like I was acting extremely weird, “Sexman, what do you think you are doing?”

Duh. What do you think I’m doing? Ann acted like she didn’t know what hit her, but she liked it of course. The guys in the band were like, “Whoa, this dude’s hardcore, man.”

We went to the table and everyone made sure Ann was out of reach of me because now I was a confirmed public assaulter-rapist, and they didn’t want any more scenes. But Ann was smiling and chatting me up the whole meal.

It’s good to give women orders too, Bob. Have you ever done that? Do. I picked up this woman in a bar once within like three minutes of walking into the joint. It was a place called the Anti-Club in Hollywood. It was 1985, the show was Christian Death, and it was too awesome.

Three minutes, I bought her a drink, had my arm around her and was feeling her up. We left the club for a while, drove around and sort of had sex in the car while driving around Hollyweird, then went back to the club.

At the end of the show, the date had gone sour, and she tried to ditch me.

I looked at her and said, “Hey, look, you don’t understand. You’re not going home with them. You’re going home with me.” Smiling the whole time.

That got her back up good. “Oh yeah? Who says?”

“Says me.” Still smiling.

“Wait a minute. Let me try something.” She tells me to stand up straight on the sidewalk and looks me up and down lasciviously for about a minute like it’s some kind of test.

“OK,” she said. So I drove her home from LA to Orange County and we managed to have sex in the car on the 5 Freeway in downtown LA going 55 miles an hour at 2 AM, which is always interesting.

She had the same name as my Mom. I told her that, and she acted disgusted, like, “Fuck your Mom, you wimp. Obviously you’re abnormally attached to her.”

Another time I had a new woman in my bedroom. I had her top off and was feeling her tits.

She whimpered, in this totally lame voice, “Please let me go home.”

Obviously she didn’t mean it.

I said, “No way, you’re staying right here.” Not real psycho-like, but firm nevertheless.

She was free to leave, as the cops say, and her car was in the driveway. At some point there was an argument.

I said, “Get over on that bed right now.” Same way, not real crazy, but firm nevertheless. She was free to say no.

Of course, she scurried over to the bed very obediently like a little puppy. Then, later, at some point, she didn’t want to have sex or something.

I just got out of bed, walked over to the couch and said, “Fine, if you don’t want to fuck, I’ll just sleep on the couch. You sleep on the bed. See you in the morning.”

And closed my eyes.

Not two minutes went by and I heard this little bird chirping, “Come on over to the bed.” You can guess what happens next.

So a proper mixture of assertiveness and indifference can sometimes work wonders.

I’m sitting here, Bob, thinking that I have to get rid of this take it or leave it attitude, but the major part of me says, “Who cares? This is the way I am, and I’m not out to kiss up to or accommodate everyone else. This is me and this is my style, like it or not, I’m not making any major changes to suit you or anyone else.”

This Roissy guy is going on and on about alpha males and beta males. I confess I don’t get it. What’s the difference? Do betas get lots of women, or is that impossible? I have a huge ego, I strut around like a rooster, I’m cocky and vain, and I think I’m Joe Hotshot With the Chicks and King of the World combined, even though it’s not true at all anymore. So is that alpha or what? I’m not sure I understand what he’s getting at.

Sexmaniacman is a Rapist

Repost from the old site. Sexmaniacman returns for another update in the Sex Wars. Bros before hos, guys!

I thought this definition of a the crime of sexual violence was interesting:

Regarding the “incapable of giving consent” hypothetical you posited, my response is, violence and/or a crime occurs when anyone’s body is touched beyond incidental contact or for more than a brief instant unless the person being touched affirmatively gives permission for such contact.It is not the “responsibility” of the person being touched to give permission. It is the responsibility of the person doing the touching to ensure that the other person has voluntarily given permission. If the other person is “incapable” of giving permission, for whatever reason, that means no permission has been given, and a crime has been committed.

Along the same lines, the feminazis says every time you have sex with a drunk woman, you are raping her. I decided to ask Sexmaniacman his opinion on this definition of rape.

Sexmaniacman:

According to that definition, I’ve been raping women and girls all my life! I’ve always touched women, I’ve reached around and jumped them and started kissing them, I’ve grabbed them, thrown them up against walls in public and kissed them, I’ve done all these things. I always grabbed women or touched them, and I never asked permission first.In general, most of the time, permission was granted, though sometimes, when I tried to go beyond kissing, she stopped me.

I picked up a hot 20 yr old woman at a Hollywood nightclub, the Anticlub, two minutes after walking in the door, then had sex with her in my car while driving around Hollywood at 1 AM (to the extent you can have sex with someone while driving a vehicle) then after the show, she tried to weasel out of coming home with me.

I pointed to her, pointed to the car, and said, “You are going home with me. Now get in the car.” It was an order, but she was free to refuse, and I was laughing. I sneered at her like Johnny Rotten. She smiled, sneered back, and said, “Says who?” I said, “Says me.” Women love guys who give them orders and they love to follow orders. So she got in the car. Quite willingly.

I drove her home and we had sex on the 5 Freeway in Downtown LA at 3 AM while going 55 miles an hour, to the extent one can do such a thing. Good thing I didn’t crash the car. I deny that this was either kidnapping or rape, but it was pretty fun.

Another time I had sex with a drunk 14 yr old (I was 16) on the rooftop of an apartment building at 2 AM, and later she went around telling everyone I raped her. I didn’t rape her; she was drunk. I deny that this was rape.

Another time I went to a punk rock show with this beautiful 20 year old named Linda and we both came back, drunk, to my house. I got her on my couch, pulled up her top and started feeling her breasts. “Pleease let me go home,” she whined unconvincingly in her best little girl voice.

“No!” I said. “You’re staying right here!” I was pissed that I went to all this damn trouble and she was trying to weasel out of the dicking, like they always do.

Plus, earlier in the evening, both of us drunk, she had put me in a shopping cart and raced me up and down some 2 AM streets. She kept “dropping her lighter” on my groin in the cart, and then “having to fish around to find it”. Now she was trying to get out of the boning. Well fuck that. The Hell you are, woman.

She was free to leave at any time, as the cops say. “Now get over on that bed right now!” I said, half-smiling and not really threatening. I’m not sure what happened later. Finally I just said, “Fine, you don’t want to have sex, I’ll just sleep on the couch. You take the bed. See you in the morning.”

Then I lay back on the couch and closed my eyes. Next thing I remember, she was saying, “Come on over to the bed.” And so it went. I deny that this was false imprisonment or rape, but it was pretty fun, except when she started to puke in bed while we were having sex, grabbed her mouth, and ran to the bathroom and puked for a while.

Basically, with women, you have to read their minds. At some point, via telepathy, you figure you can make your move. At that point you just grab her and start kissing her. You can do it really aggressively or you can do it real soft and nice. Most of the time, it goes just fine. Having to ask permission for everything you do sexually is insane. If we had to do that, no one would ever get laid.

I’ve been having sex with drunken women most of my life, and I hope to continue doing so. A lot of women are way less inhibited when they’re drunk.

I’m embarrassed to admit that there have been quite a few times when I grabbed at women and they did not want to do go along, so they pushed me off or said no in some way or another, along the lines of, “Hey! Knock it off, asshole! Get your hands off me!” Most of the time, I did just knock it off right then, though sometimes I kept trying my luck, and she kept knocking my hands away, raising her voice.

I deny that this is rape or attempted rape or any crime at all. It’s actually something called “dating”, and I never got any sex any of those times anyway. Once they brush you off once, you might as well give up, because you aren’t getting any.

I don’t believe I’ve ever raped a woman according to the legal definition of the word. If she’s not interested, no problem. She has ownership of her body and the right to decide not to do this or that with me. As far as the feminist version of rape law above, well, they can just fuck off.

Sexmaniacman Is A Creep

Repost from the old site. Sexmaniacman weighs in, as usual, in the Sex Wars, the War Between Men and Women, that is, the war that never ends, it never starts it never stops it just goes it never zeroes.

Sexguy takes the logical position, that, absent any true bad behavior on the part of the guy, he generally roots for the hometeam in the Sex Wars. The problem nowadays that way too many of our fellow “men,” the manginas, have are essentially moles, traitors, spies and internal saboteurs.

They live and work among us, they claim to be one of the guys, but when it comes down to brass tacks, they always root for the Female Enemy against their Fellow Man. Sexdude takes the logical position that males ought to adopt a “bros before hos” attitude, and I agree.

It’s official. Sexmaniacman is a creep. And a pervert. And he’s proud.

Sexmaniacman just learned the definition right here. First of all, “creep” is a woman word, and no real male would commonly use such a word as a noun or a verb. Sexmaniacman just doesn’t use it in general, because he’s a real man, not a pussified ally of the females, but every now and then, it’s appropriate.

For instance, Sexman’s Mom works at a college. There was a male student there for a while, socially inept, who used to hide under and behind cars out in the parking lot and jump out at the college girls. I guess he thought it was funny or something.

The girls were not amused and they kept complaining to the administration. With some regret, Sexmaniacman will admit that this guy’s behavior is creepy. But really, it’s only creepy in that they don’t find him attractive.

If Leonardo DiCaprio was hiding behind cars and jumping out at them, about 50% of these fine upright examples of innocent American feminine goodness, purity and light would have fucked him already (Not that they’re sluts or anything like that!), and most of their “sweet and innocent” friends would be waiting in line.

So it’s not necessarily the behavior that these silly little woman-children don’t like, it’s the fact that the guy is unattractive, unwanted and unappealing, and then he’s trying his luck with them.

He realizes this was frightening to the girls, but Sexmaniacman happened to know the idiot who was doing this, and it’s just his opinion that the guy’s completely harmless, though obviously a social retard.

These strong, modern, rough, tough, feminist puffed-up ladies should have just told him to fuck off a few times, and probably it would have all stopped. But apparently they kept running away like the little girls they really are deep down inside, so the behavior continued for too long.

So, yeah, Sexmaniacman is obviously a fucking creep according to the definition below. Plus he’s a pervert. He never was one, but then he hit 45 or so, and now he can’t look at young women anymore in case he gives them a heart attack or induces post-traumatic stress disorder or molests them with his eyeballs requiring years of weepy and bank-breaking therapy sessions to untwist their poor fragile psyches.

Sexguy is perfectly aware that the vast majority of young women don’t find guys his age attractive anymore. That’s very painful for him to realize. He looks at younger women, and he doesn’t think, “Wow, I have a chance with her.” Instead, she often reminds him of so and so who he dated or slept with back in 1978. So he’s looking at them and reminiscing, wistful memories of days gone by. And if that pisses you little bitches off, well he says too fucking bad.

They looked great then, and they look great now.

Beauty contestants focus on females aged around 18-20. Other than the fact that they probably can’t use minors, the reason they do this is because at this age, females of all races, in all cultures, and at all times, are at the peak of their physical beauty.

It’s a common myth that a guy hits 45 and 50 and can’t get an erection anymore. Actually, many of us guys still can and do, believe it or not, Sexmaniacman noted. We may be old, but we’re not dead. You can’t touch a 16-17 year old girl with a 10-foot pole and an 11-foot extension, but they sure are nice to look at. If acknowledging this makes Sexdude a pervert and a fucking creep, then he will wear that badge proudly.

Sexmaniacman probably wouldn’t want to sleep with them even if it were legal, because it’s impossible to have an intelligent conversation with these silly girly things. Not that older women are much better!

Sexmaniacman will aver that when he was 43 years old, he had an 18 year old Korean girlfriend from LA. Eat your heart out, bitches.

You hate that sooo much, don’t you?

Good.

From the site:

I think I’ve generally come to the conclusion that a lot of women’s definition of a “creepy guy”/pervert is:

 

A guy they find unattractive, who checks them out.

Most straight women, of course, liked to be noticed by guys they find attractive, and a lot of women will dress to attract men they fancy. The problem a lot of women seem to have is, is that there’s an unwanted side effect. If they dress sexy, they not only get looked at by the sexy guys, they also get looked at by the guys they don’t fancy.

Well, yeah, duh. If you don’t want us to look at your fucking tits, Sexmaniacman suggested, then don’t walk around with your boobs hanging out. If you’re showing cleavage, or God forbid have your tits halfway hanging out, Sexbro is going to look right at them, Goddamn it, and fuck you if you don’t like it. If it pisses you off so much, dress like a lady for Chrissake.

It’s like during the 1980’s when all political correctness issues came to the fore with a vengeance. In a work setting, a bloke could chat a woman up. If she fancied him, it was fine and dandy. If she didn’t, it was called sexual harassment.

 

Yeah.

Sexcat figure that’s probably what’s going on in a lot of this sexual harassment bullshit. He remembers he worked at a place once where the whole office freaked out because some poor schmuck asked a woman out. To look at the guy, Sexman figured he probably hadn’t been laid by a non-professional in at least months, so he had a God-given right to ask, and Sexguy felt deep sympathy for his sex-deprived brother.

She was being nice to him and talking him, and all the silly bitch had to do was say no and that was that. The guy was civilized, he would have just taken it like a man. But oh no, Ms. Silly made it into a capital fucking offense, and it was the talk of the whole office for a while.

Being a real guy, not a wuss, of course Sexbuddy took the guy’s side in this skirmish of the War Between Men and Women, but most of the “men” in the office sided with Ms. Silly, like knights running to save her honor. With Sexguy, he usually supported the guys in a Male Versus Female situation. Bros before ho’s, right guys?

Afterward the poor guy told Sexpal that management told him that sexual harassment guidelines said that employees should not be dating. Great. Here it is, in the modern US, where so many of us are working long hours, and we can’t date at work. Great. So how are we supposed to get laid?

Sexmaniacman finally had to adopt some new rules to deal with this bullshit, but he realized he was not the only one. He read a sociology paper about guys who moved down to Costa Rica. One guy said when he was 50, an uppity 17 year old girl spit at him for looking at her. I guess that was the last straw, and he high-tailed for the sexually relaxed tropics.

His 43 year old sick, perverted, creepy brother had some advice: “Sexguy! Look. Invest in some sunglasses! I look at them all the time. That’s one of the great things about being in junior college – I’m surrounded by 18-20 yr old hotties!”

Sexdude’s new rules were to avoid looking at obviously underage girls or sometimes even those around 18-20, but it was so hard to tell ages. He’d look at em a bit, see if they looked back, and if they didn’t, he’d try not to look at them too much. Kind of hard to do when they are young and beautiful!

Sexmaniacman also noticed something disturbing about this bullshit. As much as these silly little twats claimed they hated it, he could not help but notice that a certain number of them (Definitely not all but for sure some!), often the better looking and older ones (18-23 or so), relished the attention they got from him.

They deliberately strutted, tipped, weaved, swayed and sashayed, flirted and winked, stole glances and battled lashes. At the stores, they shoved the others out of the way so they could ring up Sexman and reap the harvest of his loving eyeballs. They smiled at him coquettishly and made bullshit excuses to get up and strut in front of him, to nowhere and to do nothing, and then traipse back, basking in the warm, delicious rays of his sick, pervy, aging gaze.

They looked at him out of the corner of their eyes and winked. When he wasn’t looking, they moved way too close and pretended to look at store things they weren’t interested in. Sexmaniacman would look down, notice a 16 year old just about brushing her tits up against him, and pretend nothing was happening.

It sure was an idiotic little girl game these female things were playing, but females often don’t make much sense to Sexguy. Some were jockeying for the eyeballs and others were bitching about illegal looking. Were some of them one and the same? Who knows?

Sexmaniacman thinks we can look at them all we want, that’s his position. If they don’t like it, they can call the cops, or take pictures of us with their bitchy cellphones and post them on their screechy blogs, or sit around and carp to their girlfriends about us.

There’s also a right and wrong way to look, Sexman thought. You look a little bit, you look away, a while later, you look again. Staring is pretty uncool.

Sexmaniacman can’t remember the last time he catcalled a woman. That’s rude, and he’s not rude.

Sexmaniacman doesn’t rub up against women, but when he was a lot younger, especially at bars and rock concerts, women were always rubbing up against him and touching him, because he was drop dead gorgeous guy, especially when he wore a beat-up 1950’s James Dean leather jacket.

Touching and groping is rude, and he’s not rude.

Jerking off in public is illegal, and guys who do that deserve cuffs.

However, he objects to the whole Feminazi mindset behind this bullshit movement, mostly because they haven’t specified where harassment begins and where it ends. Supposedly the females get to make up the rules here, on an individual, case by case basis! Great!

Webpage here , and most of these guys portrayed here are idiots, Sexguy agrees, but he’s still worried that there are no boundaries here. Sexman is particularly disturbed by the modern notion that he can no longer talk to teenage girls or young women in any way or at any time or about anything, since they automatically assume he’s trying to pick up on them, when usually he’s just trying to make some innocent conversation.

Also, the silly feminist bitch idea is that all women hate being looked at. Bullshit.

Sexman’s beautiful aunt was in the Castro District of San Fransisco eating at a cafe with Sexman’s Mom. His aunt is a silly woman, like most women are at least sometimes.

She’s getting all upset. “None of these men are looking at me,” she pouted huffily. She’s beautiful, and male looks are like vitamins for her soul.

Duh. They’re all gay.

Sexmaniacman also knows some older women who love to be or would love to be looked at. One, 50 years old, mournfully told him that she wishes men or even boys would look at her. One delighted in telling him how young men and even boys continued to check her out, and how she loved every second of it, being 50 years old.

This video shows a silly feminazi bitch who’s actually pretty good-looking, who got all dressed up in a really sexy and revealing outfit, then strutted like an idiot down a main avenue in New York, then, like a dumbshit, got all pissy when of course most of the guys looked at her. I guess the numerous fags didn’t look at her, so they must be better than the straight guys. So the solution I guess is we all just turn queer? Obviously.

This ditzy broad tells one guy he was looking at her breasts. He was, but he did it because her tits were hanging out, you goofy woman.

Sexmaniacman thought a lot of these guys were looking way too long and way too obviously, but last time I checked, it’s America, still a free country despite everything, and you have a right to act stupid.

Sexdude was actually trying to control his diabolical and wicked looking behaviors lately, but the young girly women-children were still getting all hot and bothered anyway. There didn’t seem to be any way to appease them once you were past a certain age.

Sexdude doesn’t like guys making comments at women without some verbal and nonverbal signals on her part (going far beyond parading around half-naked like the goofy bitch in the video), but all in all, the woman in this video is one dumb cunt.

Sexmaniacman Praises Sex Crimes

Repost from the old site. More from Sexmaniacman, philosopher, legal scholar and libertine.

Sexmaniacman kept reading the news in the papers and on the Net, and could not believe his eyes anymore.

A US diplomat goes to Brazil and “molests” some “little girls” aged 14-17, which Sexmaniacman assumed is perfectly legal in Brazil. He comes back to the US and gets arrested on “pedophile” charges.

A gay man “molests” a 15-year-old gay “little boy” prostitute in the Philippines, comes home to the US, and is arrested and labeled “pedophile.” His arrest is uncovered when he goes to work for a local politician, and his career is shot.

A local US mayor with long hair and a beard like a ZZ Top musician “molests” a 15-year-old “little girl”. He’s sentenced to prison and reviled by a town who hopes he stays away for a long time.

Roman Polanski gives a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude long ago, “molests” her, and flees the phony prosecution for the sanity of France, where he remains to this day.

Mark Foley does little more than talk dirty to some “little boy” pages aged 16-17 (some of whom apparently enjoyed it), never touches any of them even once, and is labeled “pedophile.”

In the UK, a father takes pictures of his kids on a slide in the park, insane irate mothers order him to stop taking pictures, and when he refuses, they go to the cops. Obviously he’s a child molester. Whoops. He’s just a father taking pics of his own kids.

Sexmaniacman looks at all the “pedophiles” above and cheers them on, despite the hysteria, although he thinks Mark Foley was an idiot. Sexmaniacman figures that if these guys want to have sex with teenagers, that’s their business. Sexmaniacman realizes it’s illegal, and he hopes he won’t do it himself, but he can’t see it as a sin.

We’re in the midst of madness. Child Molester Mass Hysteria, to be precise.

Sexmaniacman did lots of “molesting”, and had lots of fun, back in the day. He was 18, 19 and 20, and the women and “little girls” never stopped coming. The females were all ages, but plenty were 14, 15, 16, and 17. He had sex with them all, and then he got up in the morning and did it some more. He’s proud of it to this very day. Nowadays, he’d be a “pedophile” for doing that. Back in the day, it was just good times.

Sexmaniacman had some “pedophile” friends. One was 28 years old, had a 16-yr-old “little girl” girlfriend, and “molested” her regularly.

Sexmaniacman cheered his friend on for this dastardly “pedophile” episode.

Sexmaniacman had another friend, Killerdude. He was 29 years old, and they were over at Killerdude’s Mom’s house getting high as kites and laughing their asses off. Killerdude’s little sister’s 15-yr-old girlfriend walked out of the bedroom and out the front door, waving goodbye. Killerdude confided to Sexmaniacman that he had just had sex with that “little girl” the other day.

His sister had approached Killerdude, said her friend wanted to have sex with him, and would he do it? He obviously obliged. What else could he do but “molest” her, right?

Sexmaniacman approved, and cheered his “pedophile” friend on.

Sexmaniacman gave up on the young girls when he turned 21. After that, they needed to be 18. In dubious cases, he even asked for ID.

Sexmaniacman read a pdf on the Net about Costa Rica. There are all kinds of American men down there having all sorts of sex fun with girls and women. In Costa Rica, a girl is a woman at age 13.

So you could say that Costa Rica is just a nation of sex perverts and child molesting sick fucks, and the whole country needs to be arrested. The males all need prison or castration or preferably both, and the females all need lifetime therapy for “getting molested.”

Sexmaniacman cheers on Costa Rica in their freedom of choice and thumbing their nose at Child Molester Mass Hysteria.

There are men down there, American men, the pdf said, older guys, and some are having sex with underage girls. It didn’t really give ages, but the implication was they are 14-17 years old. The guys are also doing it with women. They were just screwing anything, like any real man does if he gets a chance. The Costa Ricans wouldn’t do anything about it because they didn’t think it was a crime.

Sexmaniacman cheered them on, all of them – the American men doing this, the Costa Ricans for shrugging their shoulders, and the girls for having a good time. He didn’t think he would want to go to Costa Rica or any foreign land and do it himself, since teenage girls hardly interested him much anymore, but he didn’t care if another guy did.

The idiots in the US government, egged on by the Child Molester Mass Hysteria sweeping the land, passed a weird and retarded law. Only women and pussy-whipped married men would ever pass such a bitchy law, but pass it did.

It bizarrely extended the purview of US law overseas! If an American man of any age goes to a foreign land and has sex with a girl or boy who is 17 years and 11 months old or younger, he goes down on US child molesting laws!

Although at first it would seem that US law should never extend to crimes committed in foreign lands, which are properly the purview of those foreign lands, Sexmaniacman realized that this happened for a reason.

Actual Western pedophiles were going to Philippines, Thailand, and other places and having sex with really young kids, because it was more or less legal over there, and the locals didn’t care. In order to put a stop to this, the US and Western Europe passed some laws to bust pedos when they went overseas to molest little kids.

Otherwise, Western pedos would run around the world seeking out 3rd World hellholes where no one cared about pedo stuff and dollars shut up everyone. In order to put a stop to this, anti-pedo laws were passed in the West extending Western law to other nations.

Sexmaniacman thought long and hard about this, and finally decided that this was really weird and legally obtuse, but still unfortunately right and proper in the case of Westerners having sex with actual little kids, but not with teenagers.

One thing Sexmaniacman bemoaned with the coming of Child Molester Mass Hysteria was the extinction of statutory rape, a perfectly valid category, and its blurring with actual pedophilia with young kids. Child Molester Mass Hysteria came to America, and quickly, a 17-yr-old girl and a 9-yr-old girl were the same thing. They were both “children”, and those of all ages who had sex fun with them were all sick evil pedo fucks.

Even teenage boys were going down on these sissy, bitchy pedo laws for the crime of proving their manliness by sticking it to their teenage girlfriends. It was as if Iraq or Iran had come to the USA. A 13-yr-old boy and his girl have some sex fun, videotape it on cellphones, and pass it around. The boy, but not the girl, goes down on charges of distributing child pornography. Just as the Feminazi bitches would have it.

The anti-pedo laws, the blurring of teenage sex fun with sick child sex, the idiot wind attacking virile teenage boys and young men – they were all part of the war American women and girls were waging on real American men and boys. The bitches’ wormboy boyfriends, vaginized male allies, and pussy-whipped husbands defending the chastity of teenage daughters – they were all behind this bullshit too.

Real American men and testosterone-charged American boys, the few that were left, should have stood up to this attack on manliness, but they were too scared of the pedo charge to speak up.

Millions of vaginized males and girlymen all over America stood up alongside their pants-wearing, hysterical girlfriends and wives, screeching defense of the fake honor of hymenless 17-yr-old girls all over our fair land.

There were some serious issues here. Sexmaniacman had to agree. What was to be done?

You couldn’t exactly legalize sex between adults and teens all the way down to age 14 or so. Otherwise you would have guys 40 and 50 walking down the street in broad daylight with their 15-yr-old girlfriends in tow. Sexmaniacman decided that that would not do.

How’s about we went back to the old days, Sexmaniacman suggested?

Two laws.

One called statutory rape , judiciously prosecuted against egregious cases of sex between men and girls and gay boys 14-17. Another, child molesting, for sex between adults and girls and boys under the age of 14.

Overseas, clearly there was a national interest in the West to stop pedos from heading to SE Asia to have sex with little kids. If the Thais won’t stop it, doggone it, we will. Sexmaniacman nodded his approval.

But Sexmaniacman could see no national interest in busting a Western man of any age for messing with a teenage girl in some sweltering foreign land. That was beyond absurd.

Child porn. Sexmaniacman pondered the very phrase, and lately did so frequently, and he didn’t even feel guilty. He loved to think about child porn, since it offered so many legal and philosophical quandaries.

Child porn! The phrase alone drove Americans to paroxysms of madness.

It actually posed a most difficult case, Sexmaniacman noted. To merely look at the stuff was a crime. Child porn was on the Net, and you could find it if you really, really tried. Could you stumble upon it? Highly dubious.

Sexmaniacman felt that in analogy, child porn seemed like the case of a book in a library. It sat on a special shelf called the Internet Shelf. The book was out there in plain view, but there were signs next to it saying DO NOT LOOK AT THIS BOOK! ILLEGAL! LOCAL ORDINANCE BLA BLA BLA! Now and again, some maniac thrillseeker would grab the book and sneak a glance at a few pages.

They would almost always be caught, and the police would haul them away. They would be bashed in the press and their communities as sickos for looking at a book in the library, and their careers and lives would be ruined.

Although this scenario seems absurd, Sexmaniacman realized that that’s pretty much how it is with child porn. It’s out there on the Net, but if you look at it, you’re going to prison. It has to be just about one of the only things on Earth, Sexmaniacman noted, that, if you look at it, you go to prison. Think about it, real hard. Anything else illegal to steal a glance at? Anyone?

Sexmaniacman pondered the weird legal and philosophical arguments for why looking at something, say, child porn, or anything, really, should be illegal:

Child porn is the portrayal of a crime.

Therefore, when you look at it, you violate the kid’s privacy. Ok, but the kid has no idea you looked at their pic. Sexmaniacman felt it was impossible to argue that by stealing a glance at their porn pic, you have psychically harmed this kid via telepathy.

Furthermore, Sexmaniacman pointed out that there are all sorts of videos out on the Net that depict crimes, sometimes homicides. Should those not be illegal too? After all, they portray a crime, no? Or should they be allowed because the victims are dead and can’t be harmed anymore?

When you look at child porn, you create a market for it, and that makes producers abuse more kids.

Well, OK, Sexmaniacman nodded. But once again, the criminal appears to be the person who made the child porn, not some guy looking at a picture.

What about trafficking? Sexmaniacman agreed this was a tough one. Here things get more dicey. Now you are actually making money off kids getting molested. He noted that this is getting quite close to actual harm, but there are still some problems.

Sexmaniacman offered up the scenario of the stuff being traded back and forth by pedos for free. No profit is involved, but Sexmaniacman figured we can’t really legalize it, can we? If we did, child porn trading sites would open up all over the web, and probably those who make the stuff would create more of it. Sexmaniacman felt that society had an interest in preventing that.

No matter that merely looking at the stuff constituted quite a bizarre sort of crime. Sexmaniacman offered up, “What if we acted logical and said it was legal to look at the stuff, but not to peddle it?” But then he noted that child porn sites would pop up all over the web, just for folks to “look at.” Society clearly has an interest in preventing that.

As far as the Internet goes, Sexmaniacman felt that probably the present state of affairs is the best. Child porn is quite illegal, hence it is extremely difficult to find, although with enough effort and hours of searching by savvy Net users, it’s surely out there. So child porn is rare and very hard to find. It’s almost impossible to stumble upon it by accident. This is probably the way it ought to be, he agreed.

Sexmaniacman pointed out that if we allowed folks to look at it, websites would sprout up all over, and hundreds of thousands or millions of people would be looking at the stuff, just like they are feasting on all the other shock stuff out there. And that didn’t seem right to Sexmaniacman.

Sexmaniacman bemoaned the fact that child porn, child molesting and statutory rape are subjects that are banned from polite conversation, and frankly all conversation, in today’s Idiot America. The only talk allowed about these subjects is to rant about how we want to castrate the sick fucks who “molest.” No problem ever got solved by not talking about it, or only talking stupid about it.

Just to piss people off and make them hate him more than they already did, Sexmaniacman deliberately brought up these subjects, especially in public, just to watch the freakouts and hard stares.

Despite the fact that hardly anyone was talking sensibly about this sick stuff but Sexmaniacman, he noted that these areas opened up a lot of interesting philosophical and legal dilemmas that do not have easy answers.

Sexmaniacman On Borderline and Schizotypal PD

Repost from the old site. The following posts will figure a fellow named Sexmaniacman, who is a friend of mine. He either wrote these posts himself and sent them to me via emails or else I am transcribing them based on conversations he had with me.

A commenter notes on the Personality Disorders

Schizotypal was always the odd-man-out personality disorder — both literally and figuratively.

Sexmaniacman thinks he had a gf once who was both a Borderline and a Schizotypal:

Hi Bob, this chick was so nuts, man, oh man oh man. She had a dx of “Borderline Schizophrenia” and was a serious acidhead.

She proudly said, “I’ve always been crazy.” Her Mom was schizophrenic and had tried to stab her in the back and kill her when she was 4 years old. Her life was desolate, and she would move back and forth between all these different personalities that you could not keep track of.

She lived in Hollywood, was a fag hag and was always getting picked up by guys and abused. She let groups of guys gangbang her and all sorts of crazy shit. She was always telling stories about guys or groups of guys picking her up, tying her up, torturing her, having sex with her, and threatening to murder her.

The stories seemed almost too weird to be true, but she was an extreme submissive who obviously was giving off “hurt me” vibes that a lot of sicko dudes might have picked up on and acted on.

She was also a bit bi and had sex with women sometimes. But she liked young girls, like 14 years old! Whoa! She also liked young boys, like 13 years old, and she loved to entertain me with stories about breaking in 8th graders. She was an old pro at this. I thought it was just plain weird.

We were going to go a lesbian bar in Hollywood and try to pick up a girl to take home with us (that was real easy to do in LA, which is full of all kinds of gays, bis and swingers), but she was so weird, I figured we would never be able to pick up any decent women.

Her idea of a good time was going to a gay bar and hanging out there all nite. I said pass.

She literally ate acid by the handful, five or eight hits at a time.

I took her to a Cure concert and for some weird reason, all these Goth chicks were grabbing me and trying to molest me the whole time at the concert, even when I was with her. While we were walking around, while we were sitting at the concert, the women just wouldn’t leave me alone. The whole thing seems like a hallucination now. It was 1983. She was flying on a handful of acid.

I took her to see Pink Flamingos, we watched Divine eat dog shit off sidewalk, and she thought that was hilarious. We went to see The Story of O, which I thought was weird, but she insisted was the story of her life.

She kept wanting me to inflict pain on her in all these different ways (A LOT of women are into pain! Is that weird or what?) but I wasn’t really into being a sadist too much. I did inflict some pain on her, but I didn’t really enjoy it. She sure did! Damn right! But it was the weirdest joy, a joy in a bottomless sadness. I couldn’t relate.

We went at forever, and she was a real screamer. One night she turned me in the middle and said, “You know what, Sexman?”

“What?”

“You’re a good fuck.” She repeated that a few times.

I’d just been turned into a complete sex object by a woman, and I didn’t even care.

I’d leave her place at the end of the weekend. Her Hollywood apartment complex was full of all these Guatemalan and Mexican illegal aliens. It was 1984 and the invasion was well under way. I guess the guys had been listening to her sexual opera performance all weekend because as I walked out, the Hispanic guys would all stand up and start clapping for me and raising their beers.

Cheers to the Master Fucker! She would drink, take acid, smoke pot, do speed, and then grab a bottle of antidepressants and start taking pills and downing them with a glass of booze.

“Whoa!” I said. “What do you think you’re doing!”

“You don’t know the pain I’m in Sexguy,” she whimpered and started crying. “You have no idea what it’s like. I need this, Sexdude.”

I shrugged and hoped she didn’t die on my watch. Who wants to deal with a dead chick and cops?

She was schizotypal in that she used language in really weird ways, and even though she insisted she had all these friends, she seemed really isolated. Plus she was just flat-out fucking weird in a way that Borderlines simply are not. Like she was on another planet, an alien. Invariably, she accused me of being a fag too for some reason like all of her faggot friends, and that pissed me off.

I will say she had more insight into my personality at the time than most other women have ever had.

She used to regale me with stories about her gay friends. Her gay friends were all these seriously weird masochist dudes into the leather scene.

Her eyes got really wide.

“My friend Jim, he’s not satisfied until the welts are this big.”

That’s one of her sicko masochist gay friends. Every time she talked about them, I told her to shut up as she was grossing me out.

She stretched her fingers to make about a one inch measurement. In her eyes, she was trying to shock me and I know it turns her on. She wanted one-inch welts too. Obviously. Like Hell you’re getting ’em from me, you sick bitch, I thought.

She called me one time but I wasn’t home. A woman I knew was over at my place in my absence and answered the phone. “Tell Sexman it’s just me,” she sighed wearily into the phone. “It’s just me. Just V.” Her self-esteem was 80,000 leagues under the sea under an anchor. The woman hung up the phone.

Later the woman said: “That’s the woman you’re dating, Sexguy?”

“Yeah,” I sigh.

“Wow, she seems like she thinks she’s the biggest zero on the face of the Earth. How sad.” The woman shook her head, and an incredible sadness came over her face too, a hundred years’ worth.

“I know.”

I broke up with her.

“Can…you…at least…give me a reason, Sexcat?” V. whimpered into the phone.

“You’re just too nuts for me. I mean, I’m nuts, but I’m neurotic. You’re way more crazy than I am, and I just can’t deal with you. It’s like dealing with someone from another planet. I can’t handle you. Good luck in the rest of your life.”

She called me a few days later, crying.

“After you broke up with me, Sexbro, I put my fist through a wall, I was so mad. Now I have a hole in my wall.”

“Over me? You did this over me? Why? Don’t bother, V. Don’t smash walls over me. I’m not worth it. Smash walls over someone else…Look, I can’t handle this, this is way too nuts.”

I got a new girlfriend, K., pretty soon, and V. had given me VD like most sluts do, something called Trichomonas with no symptoms in the male. I immediately gave it to the new girl, and it causes four days of misery in the female. The new woman was pissed.

I said the only thing you can say when you give your girlfriend VD.

“Hey, don’t ever say I never gave you anything.”

I thought that was pretty funny.

She sure didn’t. Icy eyes shone at my across the room.

“That’s not funny, Sexman.”

“Yeah it is.”

“No it isn’t.”

I saw V. again two years later. She came down to visit me, an hour’s drive. I saw her on my porch like a lost poppy, the most forlorn thing you ever saw. We went inside and had some wild sex for a couple of hours. She got pissed at the way it ended and left in a huff.

I never saw her again.

I assume she’s dead, probably long ago. The way she was, she couldn’t have lasted long.

"Between Twenty and Forty," by Alpha Unit

Unfortunately, I pretty much agree with this Alpha Unit post.
This is why elders, usually older men, have always run the show in every known human society. No sane society ever puts the 23 year olds in charge. And when they are in charge, as when the Khmer Rogue was running Cambodia and a bunch of 15 year olds were running around with AK-47’s, well, we all know how that worked out. That’s pretty much what happens when you give the reigns over to a bunch of youngsters. If 23 year old’s ran the show, first of all, they would make just about everything legal.
This would actually probably cause a lot of problems, though it’s sounds good to us libertines. They’d also do a bunch of other crazy things. They would probably have public executions, and these would turn into wild parties where audience members would probably get hurt or killed. They’d probably start a lot of wars. They’d do a bunch of other stupid shit, but you could not criticize them, because people that age, well, they know everything, you know.
I knew a woman a few years back, in my mid-40’s. She was a college girl. Nothing ever came of it, but we were talking for a bit. I asked her if I was too old for her and she said, “That’s ok. All men are boys until age 40 anyway.”
William Faulkner, Mississippian and Nobel Prize laureate, gave an interview in 1956 to the Paris Review in which he spoke of writing, writers, and art – among other things. Faulkner is direct and unsentimental; he sounds world-weary. At one point the interviewer repeats a charge that Faulkner finds it hard to create characters between the ages of twenty and forty who are sympathetic. He responds, in part:

People between twenty and forty are not sympathetic. The child has the capacity to do but it can’t know. It only knows when it is no longer able to do–after forty. Between twenty and forty the will of the child to do gets stronger, more dangerous, but it has not begun to learn to know yet.
Since his capacity to do is forced into channels of evil through environment and pressures, man is strong before he is moral. The world’s anguish is caused by people between twenty and forty.

Yes. The young and vigorous need to be watched. They need to be held in check, and the only ones who can do it those more experienced, those who have trodden the path the young have just discovered. But…being young and vigorous, they are unlikely to listen. Being young and vigorous, they won’t hesitate to tell you that they must correct the wrongs created by others before them. Others who had been just as young and full of zeal.

References

Faulkner, William. 1956. The Art of Fiction. Interviewed by Jean Stein. Paris Review, Issue 12.

“Between Twenty and Forty,” by Alpha Unit

Unfortunately, I pretty much agree with this Alpha Unit post.

This is why elders, usually older men, have always run the show in every known human society. No sane society ever puts the 23 year olds in charge. And when they are in charge, as when the Khmer Rogue was running Cambodia and a bunch of 15 year olds were running around with AK-47’s, well, we all know how that worked out. That’s pretty much what happens when you give the reigns over to a bunch of youngsters. If 23 year old’s ran the show, first of all, they would make just about everything legal.

This would actually probably cause a lot of problems, though it’s sounds good to us libertines. They’d also do a bunch of other crazy things. They would probably have public executions, and these would turn into wild parties where audience members would probably get hurt or killed. They’d probably start a lot of wars. They’d do a bunch of other stupid shit, but you could not criticize them, because people that age, well, they know everything, you know.

I knew a woman a few years back, in my mid-40’s. She was a college girl. Nothing ever came of it, but we were talking for a bit. I asked her if I was too old for her and she said, “That’s ok. All men are boys until age 40 anyway.”

William Faulkner, Mississippian and Nobel Prize laureate, gave an interview in 1956 to the Paris Review in which he spoke of writing, writers, and art – among other things. Faulkner is direct and unsentimental; he sounds world-weary. At one point the interviewer repeats a charge that Faulkner finds it hard to create characters between the ages of twenty and forty who are sympathetic. He responds, in part:

People between twenty and forty are not sympathetic. The child has the capacity to do but it can’t know. It only knows when it is no longer able to do–after forty. Between twenty and forty the will of the child to do gets stronger, more dangerous, but it has not begun to learn to know yet.

Since his capacity to do is forced into channels of evil through environment and pressures, man is strong before he is moral. The world’s anguish is caused by people between twenty and forty.

Yes. The young and vigorous need to be watched. They need to be held in check, and the only ones who can do it those more experienced, those who have trodden the path the young have just discovered. But…being young and vigorous, they are unlikely to listen. Being young and vigorous, they won’t hesitate to tell you that they must correct the wrongs created by others before them. Others who had been just as young and full of zeal.

References

Faulkner, William. 1956. The Art of Fiction. Interviewed by Jean Stein. Paris Review, Issue 12.

China Turns Towards Maoism

This is an interesting article about a turn to the Left among some factions of the CCP in China, particularly a revival of Maoism. Though the article, as usual for Asia Times, has an anti-Mao bent, it’s nevertheless good news. Interestingly enough, much of the movement is coming from younger cadre. Another faction is the sons and daughters of the veterans of the Long March.

The turn towards Maoism takes many forms, and many are not necessarily economic. It’s interesting that in China now, privatization is working backwards. That is, state firms are swallowing up many private firms. And most of last year’s stimulus went to state firms.

What most people don’t realize is that much of China’s economic revival is being led by public firms of one type or another. These firms are often owned at least nominally by local municipalities, often smaller ones, and labor collectives.

The #3 manufacturer of televisions in the world, maker of TV’s for many multinational TV makers, is a publicly owned firm. At root is a Maoist practice whereby many or most public firms are actually formally owned by the workers, including this TV firm. Management is still relatively autonomous, but the profits from the firm go straight into the worker’s pockets as paychecks. However, my understanding is that they are required to reinvest 90-95% of the profits back into company. What’s left over is often a hefty sum though.

Firms run by small cities have been extremely successful. Cities compete with each other and build homes and other amenities for workers. The best firms make lots of money and the workers as formal owners get to take home a chunk of it. The most successful firms have long lists of workers wanting to move to these prosperous cities. Much of this manufactured material is also exported.

What’s funny is that that Made In China product you bought at the store may well have been made by a public firm. Oh, the horrors of socialism!

Although hardline Maoists decry China’s present economic project, saying that they have abandoned socialism for capitalism, that’s not really true.

If you go outside the cities into the rural areas, such as the wild areas, all of that land is owned by the state. Although the state has had problems in the environmental arena, in many cases the state stewards wildlands well. If that land were all privately owned, I assure you most of it would be developed with an eye towards profit or habitation. China’s wildlands and wild species would be in much worse shape than they are now, and on a worldwide scale, China is not a center of mass extinctions or endangered species.

It is capitalist countries, mostly rainforest ones, such as Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Philippines, Madagascar and Mexico that are leading the extinction and endangerment epidemic, not China.

The Nepalese Maoists have gone to China’s rural collectives and come back with smiles on their faces. Compared to Nepal, China seems like a socialist paradise. The same could be said for India. China’s people are much better off than India’s in a socialist manner of speaking.

Nevertheless, it is simply outrageous that in China, people are dying because they cannot afford healthcare. That’s really disgusting. The state has been trying to extend insurance to the masses, and state insurance is for sale that covers 85% of expenses, but it’s too expensive for most Chinese.

Much of the progress in education that was made during the Cultural Revolution, especially in the rural areas (and incredible progress was made) has, incredibly, been in a process of reversal. Schools are being shut down in rural areas all over China. This is the damned economic miracle you capitalist-lovers are raving about. Tastes more like crow to me.

Furthermore, China continues to support North Korea, and North Korea is the source of most of Iran’s missiles. This blog supports the efforts of both North Korea and Iran to obtain nuclear weapons as deterrents, but hopefully not to use them.

North Korea’s nukes are the subject of a lot of misinformation. Yes they have a working nuclear device, but I think it is only a small one, maybe 15% as large as the Hiroshima bomb. They’ve had a hard time detonating bigger bombs. They seem to have several of these, maybe 5-10. North Korea also has working missiles, but they’ve had a hard time making long range missiles that go much further than Japan. A lot of these are just failing. Furthermore, I do not believe that they have figured out how to put a nuclear device onto a missile and detonate it.

People don’t understand nuclear missiles at all. First, it’s hard as Hell to make one. Next, it’s very hard to make good rockets that go 1000’s of miles with good accuracy. Third and most important, once you get the bomb, it is a whole matter altogether to figure out how to stick the thing onto a missile in such a way that it detonates on landing when firing the rocket. This is called weaponizing the warhead. It’s a whole new ballgame. Many states have had nuclear programs that have aborted or run aground at one or the other of these phases.

All in all, the movement towards Maoism in China is great news!

Robert Lindsay Now In Top 215 Blogs On The Internet

We are now averaging 61,852 visits a day.

We have such huge sites as Glenn Greenwald’s Unclaimed Territory (Glenn Greenwald!), John Araviso’s Americablog, Jane Hamsher’s Firedoglake (Firedoglake!), Wonkette (Wonkette!) and Wizbang!.

We are closing in on Pharygula and Power Line, but I think it’s going to be hard to pass them, and I’m wondering if this run is hitting ceiling.

61,852 X 7 = 432,964 visitors a week. We are the equivalent of a weekly magazine with 430,000 readers, but I can’t think of any offhand.

61,852 X 31 = 1,917,412 visitors a month. So we are the equivalent of a monthly magazine with 1.9 million circulation, but I can’t think of any of those offhand either.

Keep in mind that print media often includes pass-along readership, so they often increase their readership by 2 or 3 times circulation on that basis.

“Who Are The Maoists And What Do They Want?” by Rita Khanna

Great stuff here. Who Are The Maoists and What Do They Want? A good overview of the Maoist revolution in India.

Now from a generic Left POV, I would have to say that this post makes it clear that all of the previous solutions have completely failed to address the needs of the vast majority of Indians.

That includes the Congress Party, of course the BJP and the Right, the “Indian socialism” of the first 20 years of India’s statehood, and even the parties of the Left, including, to their shame, the Communist Parties in power. Not to mention the neoliberalism of the last 15 years or so. Failed, all failed.

Now that leaves your generic Leftwinger a couple of choices. To continue to support the various failed projects of the past, Left, Right or Center, or to try something new for a change. It’s clear that the Maoists, for better or worse, are the only people in India who even have a chance at addressing the various problems outlined below. Therefore, I support the Maoists! Not because I’m a Maoist myself (I’m more of a grocery list Leftwinger, and I even support social democracy in many places as the greatest good for the greatest number) but because their model is way better than all of the atrocious alternatives.

There aren’t enough Communists in India to put this project forward, nor enough in the world to support them. So the Maoists need the support of all Communists, socialists and even progressives in general for their cause, and they ought to welcome support from the non-Marxist Left and even non-Leftist liberals and progressives.

After reading this, all I can say is, “Go Maoists Go!”

War Against the Maoists: But Who Are They and What Do They Want

Rita Khanna

Radical Notes Journal

November 19, 2009

Author’s Note: This is meant to be a simple and brief exposition of the goals and strategies of the Maoist movement in India for people who may not have much awareness about it and are confused by the propaganda in the mainstream media. This does not go into the arcane debates about mode of production in India, the debates among communist revolutionaries over strategy and tactics etc. This aims at people who, for example, are perplexed why the Maoists, instead of trying to ensure safe drinking water like an NGO, rather, often resort to violent activities against the Government.

The Indian government is launching a full-scale war against the Maoist rebels and the people led by them in different parts of the country. The initial battles, without any formal announcement, have already started. For this purpose, they intend to deploy about 75,000 security personnel in parts of Central and Eastern India, including Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Jharkhand. The government will organize its regular air force in addition to paramilitary and specially trained COBRA forces. The air force has begun to extend its logistic support.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Home Minister P. Chidambaram have declared the Maoist rebels to be “the biggest internal security threat” to India and a hindrance to “development.” The mainstream media seem to have taken them at their face value.

Their publications and television programs seem to be building a war hysteria against the Maoist rebels regardless of the fact that this attack by the government will be directed against some of the most deprived of the Indian people. Indeed this is turning into a war of the state against its own people!

While paying lip service at times to the notion that the current people’s insurgency led by the Maoist rebels has its root in decades of vicious exploitation of the poor, especially the Dalits and tribals, the blare of government propaganda tries to convince us that the Maoist rebels are dangerous, bloodthirsty terrorists determined to establish their areas of influence.

The Government is preaching that the Maoists can go to any extent to maintain their influence in these areas – by either preventing the government from undertaking development activities or by using the power of their guns and killing disobedient individuals. Their ideology is to terrorize the common people, wrest power from the democratically elected governments and destroy the entire fabric of the society.

The government and the media want us to believe that the only people, apart from a few romantic misguided intellectuals, who willingly support Maoists are the poor, ignorant, uneducated, uninformed tribal people. They seem to claim that no sensible, intelligent person living in a society like ours would support them voluntarily. But is this a true picture?

Could it be that the Maoist rebels are supporting and organizing the poor, exploited people to fight oppression, to establish a more egalitarian society where the wealth of our growing economy will be spread among all, not merely among a very small minority? Could it be that in the name of suppressing the Maoists, the state is going all out to break the backbone of these poor peoples’ fight? Could it be that the government is planning to wage a war, in our name, against our own sisters and brothers to help line the pockets of the rich?

In this hour of crisis, we must ask those questions that the government seeks to suppress.

What do we really know about the Maoist rebels, their ideology, their plans and programs? Why does the government need to go to war against its own people and inside its own territory? Are the Maoists really blocking development? Who are these Maoists anyway and what do they want?

Let us take one question at a time.

Who are these Maoists?

The Maoists are revolutionaries mainly extremely poor people, including a large number of Dalits and tribals. They come mainly from the toiling masses of India, and they are trying to organize the vast population of such masses of this country. They seek to arm and train them so that these masses can resist the onslaught of the rich. In this effort, they go beyond the idea that mass movements should focus on some specific issues like wage increases, better health care, more honesty of public servants and so forth.

The view of the Maoist rebels is that the poor and exploited people must first and foremost establish their own democratic political power and their own state power in various places. This is because without controlling state power, the poor and the exploited can at most hope for only limited improvements in their living conditions, i.e., so long as it does not inconvenience the rich who usually control the state power.

So, the Maoists mobilize the poor to fight against the existing state, even with arms if possible, as they consider the existing state to be a set of agents acting for the big multinational corporations, rich landlords and the wealthy in general.

The fight is an extremely challenging and unequal one, as the rich are aided by the government bureaucrats, the police and even the military. Also, contrary to what the Government and the mainstream media are propagating, the Maoist rebels are actually completely opposed to individual killings; they openly denigrate such stray terrorism-like acts. What they have been attempting to build up is a mass movement, even armed, to take on the violence of the ruling classes and its representative state machinery.

The Maoist movement was born in India in the late 1960s, after a radical section of political workers broke away mainly from the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPIM) because they felt the CPIM and other such parties like CPI, RSP, etc. had discredited themselves with their opportunist politics of placating and compromising with the rich. The movement has a long history of development. The present party, CPI (Maoist), came into being in 2004 by the merger of a number of fraternal organizations.

Is development in India arrested because the Maoist rebels are blocking it?

What is the state of the people of India at present? With its current high rate of growth, this is also a country of abject poverty and extreme inequality. Home to 24 billionaires (second largest in Asia according to Forbes), India can also boast of 230 million people who go to bed on a half-empty stomach (World Hunger Report).

A country whose economy grows at 9% cannot feed its own population – at least 50% of the people live below the official poverty line and 47% of children below the age of three are underweight (World Bank Report, Undernourished Children: A Call For Reform and Action).

In this so called “hub of knowledge economy,” only 11% of the total population can afford higher education, and 50% of the students drop out before 8th grade to start living as casual laborers (Education Statistics, Indian Ministry of Human Resource Development). This is true of most of India, not just the areas where Maoist influence and control is high. Then how can we say that development in India is being blocked by Maoists?

Maoists do not oppose “development” at all, they only oppose the “pro-rich development” at the expense of destitution or often total destruction of the poor. For example, in the Dandakaranya region of Chhattisgarh, they oppose the setting up of helipads, but there, the poor themselves, led by the Maoist rebels, have built irrigation tanks and wells for help in agriculture, something the Indian government did not bother to do.

The Indian government routinely blames the Maoist rebels for blowing up schools! But what the government tries to suppress is that these blown up school buildings were actually being used or requisitioned as  camps for security personnel!

And what changes do they want? Why do they want these changes?

(1) Overhauling the entire structure of oppression instead of piecemeal reforms

In addition to all the woes described above, India is also a country where thousands of Muslims can be butchered in broad daylight by fascist Hindu forces (the most widespread and gruesome such pogrom in recent times happened in Gujarat in 2002), while the ministers and police look the other way.

And these features are not the stray results of the misdeeds of a few villains. The existing sociopolitical system in India has a built-in mechanism which ensures that the common masses will be oppressed by a rich and powerful few. Widespread systemic violence is required and is routinely applied by the Indian state so that common people remain disciplined and do not revolt in the face of oppression.

(2) Land to the tillers and destruction of the landlord class

About 60% of the Indian population is still dependent on agriculture. However the primary input, land, is predominantly concentrated in the hands of a few landlords and big farmers. Close to 60% of rural households are effectively landless (NSS Report). The elite in the villages, by their collusion with the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats, have blocked any meaningful land reforms.

In the last four decades the proportion of households with little or no land (landless and marginal farmer households) has increased steadily from 66% to 80%. On the other hand the top 10% of the rural households own more land now than in 1951 (NSS report).

The Maoist revolutionaries want to change this to ensure equitable distribution of land. They do not deter the landless and poor peasants and the poor rural labourers from collective armed fight against the existing state power for achieving this goal.

(3) Freedom from money lenders and traders

Indebtedness in rural India has been increasing by leaps and bounds, especially in the recent decades. Public rural banks are closing down due to relaxation of government regulation. Therefore, instead of securing credits from public institutional sources, rural folk are now being forced to approach the village money lenders (who are often big landlords or rich farmers as well) on a larger and larger scale.

Unscrupulous traders are adding to the misery of poor peasants. They sell spurious inputs to small and marginal peasants at exorbitant prices. They also make huge profits by buying their harvest at throwaway prices and selling them in urban areas at a premium.

Not-so-well-off peasants, in this no-win situation, of course end up needing substantial credit. Private moneylenders and various for-profit financial companies take advantage of this situation by extracting enormous sums from peasants. Interest rates can be as high as 5% per month. The BBC News reported that more than 200,000 farmers have committed suicide in India since 1997 under the pressure of such indebtedness.

The Maoist rebels want to change this.

(4) End of caste system and eradication of untouchability

It is well known that the caste system is still thriving in India. Economically it keeps the overwhelming majority of the people in dire poverty and politically it suppresses their fundamental democratic rights. Often the lower castes are robbed of their human dignity. They are even denied access to public facilities like some sources of drinking water, schools etc.

An Expert Group of the Planning Commission reports that in 70% of villages lower caste people cannot enter places of worship and in more than 50% of villages, they don’t have access to common water sources (Expert Committee Report to the Indian Planning Commission).

According to an NCDHR report, on average, 27 atrocities (including murder, abduction and rape) against Dalits take place every day. The well-off landed sections in the villages still come mainly from the upper castes. They use Brahminical ideology to try to keep all other sections of the population under domination.

The same is true for usurers, merchants, hoarders, quarry owners, contractors – all mainly come from the upper castes. In short, the upper castes are still very much in command in all aspects of rural life. Often they run a parallel raj with their own private army of goondas.

The Maoists want to break this stranglehold of the upper castes and ensure equal rights for Dalits and Adivasis.

(5) Freedom from exploitation by foreign multinationals and its local partners

Since 1991, foreign capital, in alliance with big capitalists like Reliance, Tata and state bureaucrats, has penetrated vast sectors of the Indian economy. Every sphere of our life, starting from road construction, electricity generation and communication networks to food retail, health and education are under direct control of this coterie. In the name of “development” thousands of acres of land are being transferred to big business and multinationals.

For example, in Bastar, Chattisgarh, in the name of the Bodh Ghat Dam project, tens of thousands of Adivasis are being forcibly evicted from their “jal-jangal- zameen” (water-forest- land). In Niyamgiri, Orissa the land which is the abode of several Dongria tribes has been handed over to the multinational Vedanta group, which will completely destroy the livelihood of these tribes, affecting more than 20,000 people. The state government and the mainstream opposition parties of the state are actively supporting such activities.

The Maoists, over the years, have been resisting such plunder.

(6) Ensuring people’s democratic rights

It is well known that elections are often a sham in India. The parliament, as we have seen several times, is a bazaar where the rich and super-rich can buy the MPs. According to the ADR (Association of Democratic Reform), the average asset of an MP has gone up to 5.12 crore in 2009 from Rs 1.8 crore in 2004. In our democracy the erstwhile rajas and maharajas, like the Scindias, are still proliferating and control the local economy and polity in many places.

And we also know the state of the judicial system in our country. The Salman Khans and Sanjeev Nandas can kill by running over commoners with their cars, yet they can still escape the law for a very long time, perhaps forever.

B.N. Kirpal, the judge, who arbitrarily ordered that Indian rivers be interlinked, ignoring the resulting ecological and human calamity, joined the environmental board of Coca-Cola after he retired.

The Maoists want to establish people’s court where poor people can get true justice. In fact, such courts run in many places where the Maoist movement is strong.

(7) Self-determination for the nationalities

The Indian government ruthlessly suppresses the national aspirations of many people. These people and their land became part of India by accident – because the British raj annexed their homeland or a despotic king wanted their land to be a part of India. Lakhs of Indian troops have been deployed in Kashmir and the northeastern states to curb the  struggles of the people in these states for their national self-determination.

Since 1958, AFSPA has been imposed in northeastern states, which allows armed forces to conduct search and seizure without warrant, to arrest without warrant, to destroy any house without any verification and to shoot to kill with full impunity. In Kashmir, there is 1 military personnel for every 15 civilian.

Cold blooded murders, like those of Thangjam Manorama Devi, Chungkham Sanjit, Neelofar and Asiya Jan, are carried out frequently in the name of “countering terrorism.” The Maoist rebels seek to establish freedom of self-determination for all nationalities.

So, to sum up, the new society the Maoists want to establish will have the following components:

  • Land to the poor and landless. Later on cooperative farming is to be established on voluntary basis.
  • Forest to the tribal people.
  • End of the rule of the rich and the upper caste in villages and the uprooting of the caste system. Uproot all discrimination based on gender and religion.
  • Seizure of the ill gotten wealth and assets of multinational corporations and their local Indian partners.
  • Self-determination for the nationalities, political autonomy for the tribes.
  • Establish a state by the poor and for the poor, where the present day exploiters would be expropriated.
  • Participation of people in day to day administrative work and decision making. Democracy at the true grassroots level with people having the power to recall their democratic representatives.

In summary: ensuring freedom, rights and democracy for all sections of the toiling masses.

What have the Maoists-led people’s struggles achieved so far?

Information in this section is taken, purposely, from the Expert Group Report to the Planning Commission, which is available on the web.

Contrary to what the media try to portray, the government’s own report says that the movement led by the Maoist rebels cannot be seen as simply blowing up of police stations and killing individual people. It encompasses a mass organization. Mass participation in militant protest has always been a characteristic of such mobilization.

Although the Maoists by their own admission are engaged in a long term people’s struggle against the oppression by the present India state, their movement has already achieved some short term successes in improving the condition of the poor people.

The Maoist movement in India was built around the demand of “land to the tillers.” Numerous struggles, led by the Maoists, have been fought all over the country, especially in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, to free land from the big landholding families. In many such cases landlords have been driven away from the villages and their land has been put in the possession of the landless poor. But the police and paramilitary do not allow the poor to cultivate such lands.

In Bihar, landless Musahars, the lowest among the Dalits, have struggled and taken possession of fallow government land. This has had the support of Maoists.

Under the leadership of the Maoists, the Adivasis have reclaimed forest land on an extensive scale in Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra, Orissa and Jharkhand. The Adivasis displaced by irrigation projects in Orissa had to migrate to the forests of the Visakhapatnam District of Andhra Pradesh in large numbers. The Forest Department officials harassed and evicted them on a regular basis. The movement led by the Maoists put an end to this.

In rural India, the Minimum Wages Act remains an act on paper only. In the forest areas of Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Maharashtra, and Jharkhand, non-payment of legal wages was a major source of the exploitation of Adivasi laborer. Maoists-led struggles have put an effective end to it. These struggles have secured increases in the rate of payment for picking tendu leaves (used for rolling beedies), washing clothes, making pots, tending cattle, repairing implements etc.

The exploitation previously had been so severe that as a result of the sustained movement led by the Maoists, the pay rates of tendu leaves collection have over the years increased by fifty times.

The movement has given confidence to the oppressed to assert their rights and demand respect and dignity from the dominant castes and classes. The everyday humiliation and sexual exploitation of laboring women of Dalit and tribal communities by upper caste men has been successfully fought. Forced labour, begari, by which the toiling castes had to provide obligatory service for free to the upper castes, was also put an end to in many parts of the country.

In rural India, disputes are commonly taken to the rich and powerful of the village (who are generally the landlords) and caste panchayats, where the dispensation of justice is in favour of the rich and powerful. The Maoist movement has provided a mechanism, usually described as the “People’s Court” whereby these disputes are resolved in the interests of the wronged party.

Why then does the government need to go to war against its own people led by these rebels instead of hailing them as true patriots?

There is a simple answer. Chattisgarh, Orissa are rich in mineral wealth that can be sold to the highest multinational bidder. The only obstacle standing between the corrupt politicians and ALL THIS MONEY are the poor, disenfranchised tribal people (and the Maoists leading them). So, this war. This is not something new in India or for that matter in other parts of the world.

Mobutu’s corrupt regime selling off the Belgian Congo piece by piece to the US, Belgium and other countries comes to mind. In the sixty years of independence from direct colonial rule, the Indian state has been doing the same. It has systematically impoverished the overwhelming majority to serve the interest of a powerful few and their foreign friends.

The impending war to evict the tribal people from their villages, on the pretext of eliminating the Maoists, will be fought at the behest of big corporations, who want to control and plunder our resources such as minerals, water and forests. It is high time that we recognize this pattern of waging war which will be fought by the poor on both sides, but will benefit only the big capitalists and their cheerleaders in the government.

Note: For an interested reader, the Banned Thought site contains an enormous wealth of information about the Maoist rebels, including their own documents.

Another Record-Breaking Week On Robert Lindsay

First off, we set another amazing weekly record, surpassing the one set just the week before by 63% or 234,911 hits. That’s an over 200,000 hit increase from just the previous week. The traffic of course was coming from Korea and Korean translations were a strong driver. I was assisted in this endeavor by a team of almost absurdly willing and helpful young Korean guys.

Old record: 372,649: October 9-15
New record: 607,560: October 16-22

A new highest visitors in a day record set on Monday, November 16. This Korean translation was once again huge on the Blogger site, while Ann Dunham Nude Pics? did well on this site once again.

Old record: 61,854 November 12
New record: 66,929 November 16

That highest day record was immediately smashed by 25% the very next day, when not only was the 70,000 mark broken, but the 80,000 mark was broken too. Once again, traffic flooded in from Korea where the same translation was starting to go viral in an insane way by being endlessly reposted on personal blogs. On the WordPress site, a new piece, A Race Realist Argument For the Existence of a Black Race, was a big hit.

Old record: 66,929 November 16
New record: 82,190 November 17

The new 1st place record was nearly broken the very next day, but the tally fell short by about 800 hits. Nevertheless, a new second place record was set, completely destroying the old one set merely two days before by 14,000 hits. Once again, these two posts were very popular. On this site, Ann Dunham Nude Pics? was popular again.

Old record: 66,929 November 16
New record: 80,623 November 18

It took only until the next day for the old highest highest visits in a day record to be broken, and it was smashed by 10,000 hits as the surfers flooded in from Korea again. The same two pieces that had been driving traffic all week continued to bring them in, and on this site, Alpha Unit’s Just a Thought along with the old reliable piece about Obama’s mother were popular.

Old record: 81,933 November 17
New record: 91,555 November 19

The very next day, the new record was totally smashed again, this time by a huge amount – 18,000 hits. The usual suspects were driving the traffic on both sites, and Korea was the main driver on the Blogger site.

Old record: 1. 91,555 November 19
New record: 109,497 November 20

On Saturday, November 21, incredibly enough, traffic was so heavy that it set a new third highest day record. This is great because interestingly enough, traffic always declines on the weekends. It’s highest during the week, typically during the workday in the US, apparently because people are accessing the Internet while at work or possibly in school. It declines after dinnertime and on weekends, I guess because most people, unlike us webmasters, actually have lives and get off the Net in the evenings and on weekends. On Saturday, traffic drops a lot, and on Sunday, it drops even more.

Traffic is highest of all typically on Monday, at least in the US. What’s interesting is that in Korea, traffic is highest of all in the evenings. This implies that Koreans go on the Net less than Americans while at work or in school or see the Internet of more of an evening leisure activity than Americans do. The usual suspects once again drove traffic on the old site, with the addition of this Korean translation of a particularly horrible video post. On this site, the old standby, Ann Dunham Nude Pics, did the trick.

Old record: 81,933 November 17
New record: 87,411 November 21

The next day, on Sunday, unbelievably enough, a new third highest day record was set, breaking the record set just the day before. This is really shocking because traditionally, Sunday is the slowest day of the week. No one is really sure why this is. The weekend is the slowest time of all. Saturday is the second slowest day of the week and Sunday is the slowest. The only suggestion is that most people have better things to do in their free time on the weekend than go on the Internet.

Once again, traffic was flooding in from Korea mostly from a smash-hit translation, but to a lesser extent this other translation also. The Koreans have been the most cooperative linguistic group so far in terms of translations. Many are young Korean males, 16-26, donating their time in order to practice their English. We are now in the Top 15,000 Internet sites in Korea, and we are getting around 46,000 Korean visitors a day.

Old record: 87,411 November 21
New record: 89,245 November 22

Three cheers for Robert Lindsay!

How Could You?

There have been some notable cases in the media lately about men who were caught having sex with 13 year old girls. The Roman Polanski case was one. Polanski was 46 years old when he did the dirty deed. The Harry Baker case in California is another one. Baker is 83 years old. This started a big discussion on the blog about men having sex with girls around that age. Thing is, I could never fit a picture to the words. I don’t know any 13 year old girls! Honestly. Why should I? I think there are some around the complex, but God forbid I should talk to them.

A picture of an unknown 13 year old girl with her brother, Mom and dog. Where is the appeal?

So I started wondering what exactly a 13 year old girl looks like. Which took me on an Internet image search. I quickly came up with several images, and I was stunned. They looked so young! I was appalled that these older men could be having sex with such a young girl.

Now, there are girls and there are women. There are also things called girl-women, which is basically a teenage girl. It’s in between a girl and a woman, in neither category. As they start getting up around 16-17, it looks lot more like a woman than a girl. But down around 13 or so, it’s a Hell of a lot more girl than woman. Hell, 13 year old girls still have baby fat on them. Only a year before, they were still playing with Barbies.

Now studies have shown that all normal males react sexually to females all the way down to age 7. The maximum reaction is at 16, and it continues at the same level on up to adult women. That is, a male reacts at the same intensity to a 16 year old girl as he does to an adult female of any age. So saying attraction to 16 year old girls is pedophilia is perverse. If it’s so, then we are all pedos.

Below age 16, the curve starts to drop off steeply, and by age 7 it is nearly gone.

This is a 13 year old Ukrainian girl, Kateryna Lahno, who recently won a major chess championship. Sure, she's cute, but a sex object? You're kidding.

So the only difference between normal males and pedophiles is of intensity and preference, not of the presence or absence of attraction. To normal males, girls between the ages of 7-12 are ho-hum. It’s not that there’s no interest, it’s just that it’s not very strong. I mean, a lot of guys might be slightly interested in doing a sheep if it came down to it and they were in the mountains for six months, but it doesn’t mean that’s what they love.

To the pedophile though the girl from age 7-12 is his prime attraction. He’s not interested in mature females. That’s nothing to him.

This 13 year old girl won a championship in Texas for text messaging, beating all comers. She looks like a little girl. It bugs me to think of any adult male having sex with her. That's messed up.

There are some pictures of 13 year old girls on this page so you can see what I mean.

I will also link to a picture of a nude 13 year old girl, which was taken by a major yet controversial Australian artist named Bill Henson. It’s tastefully done and you can’t see all that much. Various courts have ruled that it’s not child pornography. The only problem I have with this guy is that he seems to be obsessed with shooting nudes of girls around this age. There is something disturbing about that.

I didn’t want to upload it to WordPress because I was afraid they would freak and shut me down. But there are numerous images of this photo on Blogger, so I’ll post it to Blogger and link to it. The interesting thing about this nude is how unerotic it is. I mean, it’s ok, but really, there’s just not much there. You look at her and shrug your shoulders and say, where’s the excitement?

Link here. Click at your own risk.

It’s ridiculous that adult men are having sex with these girls. Keep your hands off em!

Some Interesting Spanish Accents

In this part of California, we get lots of tourists. In addition, there are so many Spanish speakers that one may as well be living in a Hispanophone country. I have to remind people now and again that this is actually the USA and not Mexico. I was in the drugstore the other day and I made an official complaint to the manager. There were two aisle signs saying something about products being on sale. Only the Spanish side of the sign was visible. The English side of the side was leaning up against a row of shelves.

I complained and said that both languages should be visible. If the sign’s in Spanish, you ought to be able to walk around to the other side of the sign and read the English. They indulged me, but it’s an uphill battle around here. I think most of these damned Hispanics around here would be pleased as Punch if everything in town was in Spanish and nothing was in English. The majority of them are illegals anyway, and they are basically Mexicans first and Americans second, if at all.

Getting on to the accents.

The first one I heard was in the mountains. It was a group of tourists going to Yosemite. Some of them looked sort of Black (more like the sort of “mulattos” you see more in Latin America than in the US), others seemed sort of like Mediterranean Whites, but they didn’t look like they were from Europe.

They were speaking a Romance language that at first I thought was Portuguese. I heard these Spanish words, but lots of Romance languages sound Spanish. Thing is, if you hear Spanish words with a weird accent, you don’t think it’s Spanish. You think it’s another language. I asked them if they were speaking Portuguese. They laughed and said they were speaking Puerto Rican Spanish. It was very different!

The mulatto-looking man was a Dominican, and he was a very handsome, quiet, polite and dignified fellow in a particular manner that not many US Blacks are.

A while later, I heard another strange language. Once again, I started hearing some Spanish words, but something said it wasn’t Spanish. It sounded more like…Italian. There were a group of them, and they looked somewhat like Mediterranean Whites from Europe. They had a very “European” air about them. I asked them what they were speaking, Was it Italian? They laughed and said they were speaking Colombian Spanish.

They were from all over Colombia, Barranquilla, Bogota, and they had a very sensual, friendly, warm manner that one often finds in Mediterranean Europeans. The young woman in particular was almost seductive, but I wondered if it were more her nature than a personal thing.

I once knew an upper class woman from Bogota who spoke the strangest yet most beautiful Spanish. It almost sounded like French or Catalan. It was one of the most sensual, seductive and sexy accents I have ever heard. I also spoke with some of her friends and relatives, and they were incredibly polite, and they also spoke with this odd accent. They showered praise and honorary adjectives on me that I don’t deserve. Upper class Colombians are some of the politest and most dignified people on Earth. What’s fascinating is that the nicest people around seem to spend most of their time slaughtering each other.

And just the other day, at the ATM, I heard another Romance language. An older couple, who looked a lot like Mediterranean Whites, were talking at the teller. The guy even wore a beret or fisherman’s cap like such men wear in Europe. I could not place the language, but once again it sounded like Portuguese or Italian, but I hadn’t the faintest idea what it was. I asked them what they were speaking, and the guy said Argentine Spanish. This is probably the weirdest Spanish or all. It sounds like Italian but with Spanish words!

Once again, the guy was effusive, friendly and warm in a way that we cold Nordics are not. He came over and put his hand on my shoulder and we had a nice talk.

Lots of funny Spanishes out there! All you have to do is open your ears.

"We Don't Respect You Either," by Alpha Unit

This is Alpha Unit’s response, or possibly rejoinder, to my piece, We Don’t Respect You. I actually encouraged her to write this. I think it’s great!
I’ve heard that Whites don’t respect Black people as a race. I think my great-grandparents got the same memo, which got sent along to my grandparents and parents, too.
To Black people, that’s like someone telling you that the earth revolves around the Sun.
Suppose that for one reason or another you ended up being owned by someone. Someone who saw you and treated you as if you weren’t really human. The fact that they saw you that way didn’t make you that way; you had all the human emotions and instincts they did. But this person can’t or won’t acknowledge that. How do you respect this person?
What about being in a situation in which you nominally have your “freedom,” but the people who run everything make damned sure you don’t really get to exercise it? They’re putting all kinds of barriers in your way to make sure you can’t exercise most of the freedoms they do–because, to them, you’re just not ready for that yet, and so it is for the common good that you stay in your designated place. Do such people get your respect?
While you’re in this situation, you and those like you are subject to freelance violence and you don’t have any recourse. If you irritate an employer in some way, he has the right to strike you, or even beat you. If you commit some serious breach of social “etiquette” you can be called out of your home and taken for a ride somewhere and taught a lesson, if you know what I mean.
If you really piss some people off, you’ll find yourself swinging from a tree. Or burned alive. They’ll bring the kids, too, and have the kids pose and smile in front of your corpse.
You’re supposed to respect people like that?
A lot of things have changed, but some things never change. Not seeing you as really human–that one hasn’t gone anywhere. One of the things I’ve noticed is that White people will say things to you that they wouldn’t stand for anybody telling them. Like where you belong.
In general human beings just balk at being told where they belong. Ask anybody who’s ever worked with children. Adults don’t like it, either, even though most of us are disciplined enough to handle being told “Sit here” or “Wait here” or “No Admittance.” But I think White people take for granted that they belong wherever they want to be at the moment.
To this day White people won’t hesitate to tell you where you belong. Decent, law-abiding Black people belong in dysfunctional, violent Black neighborhoods with all the other Black people–you know, to be a good example to them. Or Black people just can’t handle the pressures of modern life, so they belong in less challenging environments. (Should they be accompanied by all the slow, incapable Whites?) If White people have decided you don’t “belong” somewhere, they really get pissed about you being there and acting as if you do.
Black people know all this. We understand how White people operate. We have come to recognize the sense of entitlement that White people have to all kinds of things–including our respect.
White people talking about how they don’t respect Black people as a race? As if any Black person gives a damn.

“We Don’t Respect You Either,” by Alpha Unit

This is Alpha Unit’s response, or possibly rejoinder, to my piece, We Don’t Respect You. I actually encouraged her to write this. I think it’s great!

I’ve heard that Whites don’t respect Black people as a race. I think my great-grandparents got the same memo, which got sent along to my grandparents and parents, too.

To Black people, that’s like someone telling you that the earth revolves around the Sun.

Suppose that for one reason or another you ended up being owned by someone. Someone who saw you and treated you as if you weren’t really human. The fact that they saw you that way didn’t make you that way; you had all the human emotions and instincts they did. But this person can’t or won’t acknowledge that. How do you respect this person?

What about being in a situation in which you nominally have your “freedom,” but the people who run everything make damned sure you don’t really get to exercise it? They’re putting all kinds of barriers in your way to make sure you can’t exercise most of the freedoms they do–because, to them, you’re just not ready for that yet, and so it is for the common good that you stay in your designated place. Do such people get your respect?

While you’re in this situation, you and those like you are subject to freelance violence and you don’t have any recourse. If you irritate an employer in some way, he has the right to strike you, or even beat you. If you commit some serious breach of social “etiquette” you can be called out of your home and taken for a ride somewhere and taught a lesson, if you know what I mean.

If you really piss some people off, you’ll find yourself swinging from a tree. Or burned alive. They’ll bring the kids, too, and have the kids pose and smile in front of your corpse.

You’re supposed to respect people like that?

A lot of things have changed, but some things never change. Not seeing you as really human–that one hasn’t gone anywhere. One of the things I’ve noticed is that White people will say things to you that they wouldn’t stand for anybody telling them. Like where you belong.

In general human beings just balk at being told where they belong. Ask anybody who’s ever worked with children. Adults don’t like it, either, even though most of us are disciplined enough to handle being told “Sit here” or “Wait here” or “No Admittance.” But I think White people take for granted that they belong wherever they want to be at the moment.

To this day White people won’t hesitate to tell you where you belong. Decent, law-abiding Black people belong in dysfunctional, violent Black neighborhoods with all the other Black people–you know, to be a good example to them. Or Black people just can’t handle the pressures of modern life, so they belong in less challenging environments. (Should they be accompanied by all the slow, incapable Whites?) If White people have decided you don’t “belong” somewhere, they really get pissed about you being there and acting as if you do.

Black people know all this. We understand how White people operate. We have come to recognize the sense of entitlement that White people have to all kinds of things–including our respect.

White people talking about how they don’t respect Black people as a race? As if any Black person gives a damn.

We Don’t Respect You

The post will deal with the extent to which Whites respect one race or another.

First of all, an anecdote to start it off. I received a link from Stormfront linking to one of my articles about genetics and race. There was a chart there (see below), that, if interpreted in one particular way, could show that Amerindians are the closest large race to Caucasians, or Whites (this assuming that Whites are closely related to all other Caucasians, which they are). The competition was Africans, Amerindians, Siberians, NE Asians, SE Asians, Oceanians and Australoids. Of these groups, Amerinds appear to be the closest to Caucasians.

The question of the closest race to Whites or Caucasians is an interesting one. First of all we need to leave out some groups that are on the border between races.

Berbers and Bedouins are two groups of Whites that are quite close to Blacks. Bedouins and North Africans in general lump Caucasian though.

Ethiopians, Somalis, etc. are, I believe more and more, an intermediate large race in between Caucasians and Blacks. Nevertheless, on most charts they lump African so we will deal with them as Africans here.

Hispanics are a recent mixed race people that is left off most charts.

There is an axis extending from Turkey to Chukotka that I call the Asian-Caucasian Axis. On some charts, many of these groups are pretty much on the border between Asians and Caucasians and some are damned hard to put in one category or another. This includes Turks, Jews, Armenians, Iranians, Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Pakistanis, South Indians, Nepalese, Kazakhs, Turkmen, Kirghiz, Altai, Shor and associated North Turkic Siberians, Buryats, Mongolians, North Chinese, Koreans and the Chukchi. It also includes all associated groups.

The Chukchi are fascinating as they are an obviously Asiatic people that actually lump Caucasian on some charts.

We will leave all of these separate groups out of the analysis since on major charts, they are just lumped into Caucasians or North Asians.

However, on these same major charts, it does look like Amerindians are the closest major race to Whites.

Here is the chart in question. As you can see, the cluster of NE Asian - Siberian/Eskimo - Amerindian is the closest major race to Whites (Caucasians). According to my reading, which may be in error, the Amerindians seem to be closer to us than the others. There are other charts that also show Amerindians as very close to Caucasians.

The commenter on Stormfront noted this and commented on it, saying that he had often felt that they were the closest race to Whites. He said that when you look at them, it’s like looking in the mirror at what we used to be thousands of years ago and we could become again. In addition, he noted that he respected them as a race.

This got me to thinking. In the US anyway, Whites respect Amerindians as a race. They didn’t used to, but even in the old days, there was massive intermarriage. There is something about an Indian woman and a White man that is hard to stop. The Latin American Whites have been trying to stop White men from breeding with mestizas and Indias for centuries, and it’s a futile cause. And I respect Indians as a race too. Sure, they’ve got their problems, but they are mostly just their own problems – drugs, alcohol, self-destruction.

Even in Latin America, Indians are not so much despised, really, or not as much as Blacks. At any rate, they are not regarded as very troublesome. They are seen as potentially verbally violent, and sometimes physically, but this is not a real problem. As one White Latin American said, “Give an Indian a handful of tortillas and a six pack and he’s good for the night and won’t give you any trouble.”

This got me to thinking about whether or not we Whites respect other races. As I said, we respect the Indian. We also respect Hispanics. Since most here have a very large amount of White in them anyway, this just makes them even easier to respect. One thing you notice very quickly is that Whites don’t really hate Hispanics all that much. It’s hard to get even redneck Whites interested in hating Hispanics. We have too much common with them, and they have too much White in them. They are similar to us genetically and culturally.

Whites marry Hispanics very readily, and the usual format is White man – Hispanic woman. Hispanic women are seen as more submissive (= feminine) than White women, so it’s a natural match. A similar principle is working with White men and Indian women and White men and Asian women. A possible reason for these similarities is that Indians originate in Asian and are still quite Asian-like.

Anyway, finally getting around to the title of the post, it then occurred to me: Whites do not respect Blacks! We flat out do not respect you. Period. Exclamation point. In what way do we not respect you?

In the deepest way possible. Whites do not respect Blacks at their very difficult to change essence. We don’t respect you as a race.

As a White man who has lived his whole life in White culture, this is painfully and obviously true for the majority of Whites.

Now, the White racists will say that Blacks do not deserve to be respected for a variety of reasons, particularly behavioral ones. Let us just leave that question aside for a moment. Regardless of whether Blacks deserve it or not, we just flat out don’t respect them at their very racial essence, and that’s the only point to consider right now.

Why do I bring this up? Because really, this is at the root of a lot of the problems between Whites and Blacks in the US. We don’t respect you. And in many ways, a whole lot of other stuff just flows right out from that. Now, if Whites respected Blacks as a race, I’m convinced that race relations would be a lot different in this society.

Just a mental snack for you to chew on tonight…

"Things I've Said to Children," by Alpha Unit

For years I taught children about the various cycles of nature.
The water cycle, I told them, involved the movement of water in its various forms–the rain came from clouds, which were simply vaporized water that had risen from lakes and rivers and the ocean.
I explained to them how the rock cycle involved magma erupting from the earth and cooling into rocks, some of which ended up in the ocean. Some of these, I said, were pressed into sedimentary rock which, due to pressure and heat, could become metamorphic rock. Due to the earth’s movement rock could be buried and become magma–and the cycle would begin anew.
They learned that on mountaintops were the fossilized remains of sea creatures; those mountaintops had once been the ocean floor.
Nature is in flux. Life is characterized by movement. There is no stillness, even if there appears to be on the surface. History is characterized by cycles; phenomena occur in waves. Permanence and certainty are unknown.
Never in history has there been permanence in human affairs, either. There never can or will be.

“Things I’ve Said to Children,” by Alpha Unit

For years I taught children about the various cycles of nature.

The water cycle, I told them, involved the movement of water in its various forms–the rain came from clouds, which were simply vaporized water that had risen from lakes and rivers and the ocean.

I explained to them how the rock cycle involved magma erupting from the earth and cooling into rocks, some of which ended up in the ocean. Some of these, I said, were pressed into sedimentary rock which, due to pressure and heat, could become metamorphic rock. Due to the earth’s movement rock could be buried and become magma–and the cycle would begin anew.

They learned that on mountaintops were the fossilized remains of sea creatures; those mountaintops had once been the ocean floor.

Nature is in flux. Life is characterized by movement. There is no stillness, even if there appears to be on the surface. History is characterized by cycles; phenomena occur in waves. Permanence and certainty are unknown.

Never in history has there been permanence in human affairs, either. There never can or will be.

African Immigrants in Europe – Is The Camp Of The Saints Coming True?

In the comments section, the brilliant James Schipper notes:

Some white countries are not very attractive, but whites can create attractive places, while so far we have not seen one black-dominated country that even remotely resembles Switzerland. This means that, it there is freedom of movement between black-dominated and white-dominated countries, there will be a massive flow from the former to the latter.

Europe has now around 700 million people and low fertility while black Africa has around 800 million and high fertility. Already there is constant illegal immigration from Africa into Europe. If nothing is done to stop this, Europe may eventually become a mainly black continent. I think that the white nationalists are quite right to warn about that.

James’ comment is absolutely right-on. This is exactly what is occurring in Southern Europe as we speak. He’s also correct that only the WN’s and the Right seem to be raising a fuss about it.

The entire European Left has gone insane on this question, and the Far Left, such as Italian Maoists who regularly send me communiques, are the most deranged of all. The Italian Maoists’ main issue seems to be to let all of the African illegal immigrants stay in Italy and get legalized. They’re obviously pro-Open Borders as the whole Western Far Left is. So they’re basically advocating a mass invasion of Italy by Black Africa, at which point Italy will become unrecognizable and will transition to a Black country. I can’t put into words what a terrible idea this is.

To which tulio responded that most Africans want to stay in Africa, and there are probably more Whites in Africa than Africans in Europe. Sure, but the Whites in Africa are not a problem and if anything, probably help the place out. Mass movement of poor, uneducated Africans into Europe is another matter altogether.

So the fact the flow goes in both directions is sort of irrelevant as it’s good in one direction for the hosts and bad in the other.

Clearly, not all Africans in Europe are bad news. A friend of mine is from Togo. He is one of the most brilliant people I have ever known, and he is Black as the night. He went to Morocco, got a degree there (and had a great time as a Catholic in a Muslim country) then went to France since he spoke French. He went to more college classes in France and graduated with honors. He was instantly snapped up by an IT firm.

This guy is so smart that he regularly works with MIT graduate students in computer science on IT stuff that is so cutting edge that I can’t make heads or tails of it. He now has a nice job in Brittany, France, and he is usually in a corporate meeting of some sort. He’s also been very popular with the White girls in France, but that’s another matter. He managed to get his sister into France too. Guys like Coco are great for France, but most Africans in Europe are not like this guy.

It’s true that most Blacks are staying in Africa, but African (Black African, not North African) immigration mostly to Southern Europe is seriously out of control. It’s kind of sad in a way because a lot of them are coming on boats, and they have to turn them back. The boats are coming to Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Malta, etc. Malta at this point is so overrun it’s almost a disaster zone. Black Africans are all over Ibiza, filling up the Internet cafes with Nigerian scammers. Almost all of the Black Africans in these cafes are Nigerian criminals.

The Black African population in Italy in Greece is a huge problem like the illegal Hispanics in the US. The countries are dominated by liberal fuckheads so they don’t want to kick them out, but the Africans can’t really live there legally. Everyone knows they are illegals, but no one really does anything about it. Kind of like this stupid-ass country! A lot of the Africans are just squatters and whatnot. Many of the Nigerians have formed criminal gangs in Italy, where the Mafia is now whacking them off as competition.

The Europeans are too nice for their own good, kind of like us.

Mass camps of immigrants are in the north of France trying to make it to the UK, where the welfare pickings are a lot better. They periodically make mad rushes for the boats to the UK. Police come in and tear down the illegal camps, but they set them right back up again. Black Africans in France are already a serious problem, and they are committing tons of crime, especially rape, including gang rape (the Black and Muslim specialty crime).

It’s sad and pitiful that these boats are heading to Europe but they really need to be turned back. Have you heard of the book The Camp of the Saints? It really is something like that, and it’s happening as I write this.

In West African nations like Senegal, boats regularly leave for Spain and Portugal.

As an aside, White nationalists like to ridicule Africans by saying that they were too stupid to even figure out how to get to Madagascar, but this is apparently not true. They did get to Madagascar a long time ago, but then I guess they forgot how to build boats to go there anymore.

That is, there was an ancient hunter gatherer population of Blacks (Mikea) who could only have gotten there by boats when the Indonesians landed, but the more modern agricultural Blacks in Africa at the time did not have the maritime knowledge to figure out how to get there.

At any rate, my point is these historical arguments are sort of stupid. Who the F cares how backwards East Africans were 1,700 years ago?

My point is that nowadays anyway, even totally backwards West African Blacks are capable of building and steering boats that take them all the way from Senegal to Spain. Not bad. The take home point is that pre-contact Africans may have been backwards, but post-contact Blacks are much more advanced. That they are more advanced due to contact with other cultures or even White cultures is not that relevant. Cultural diffusion happens!

More Records Smashed On Robert Lindsay

Records continued to tumble on Robert Lindsay this past week.

Best of all, a new record for highest week ever was set. The old record was totally smashed, with the new record surpassing it 125% or 207,000 hits. Wow! That’s an average of 53,236 hits a day.

Old record: 165,079: October 2-8
New record: 372,649: October 9-15

On Monday, the first day of the week, a new record was immediately set. The old record for 4th highest day, set only two days before, fell. The new record surpassed it by about 5,000 hits. These two articles were once again popular, especially the one about the supposed nude photos of Ann Dunham.

In addition, Alpha Unit’s latest brought in a lot of visitors, unusual because her pieces are not usually big hits (only a few posts are big hits on the site). This suggests that Alpha Unit may be getting more popular. Good for her!

Old record: 29,472 November 7
New record: 34,531 November 9

The next day, November 10, a new record for highest day ever was set. The previous record was set only six days before. The new record surpassed the old one by about 3,000 hits, or 10%. Once again, these two posts were popular from Korea. This one is a Korean translation. It’s pretty amazing that a translation can drive so much traffic, but I am having excellent luck with carefully crafted translations. More bloggers should consider carefully crafted translations as potential traffic drivers.

On this site, this post was once again popular.

Old record: 45,160 November 4
New record: 48,031 November 10

The very next day, November 11, the new record for highest day was immediately smashed again, this time by about 8,500 hits, or almost 20%. This is the first time we ever passed 50,000 hits in a day. The traffic drivers were similar to the ones the previous day, and once again, most of the traffic was from Korea. On this site, the Ann Dunham Nude Pics? post was once again popular. I am not sure what that’s all about, but I think some of these Birther crazies are latching onto the “Obama’s Mom was a porn star” meme.

Old record: 48,031 November 10
New record: 56,786 November 11

A new first place record was set on Thursday, November 12, passing the old record set only one day before by over 5,000 hits. The Korean traffic once again drove this huge day.

Old record: 56,786 November 11
New record: 61,854 November 12

A new record for second highest day was set on November 13, breaking the old one set only two days before. The Korean translations were a big hit on the old site, especially this one.

Old record: 56,786 November 11
New record: 59,301 November 13

A new fourth highest day record was set on November 14, breaking the previous record set on four days prior. That is extremely high traffic for a Saturday. The Korean translations were a huge hit on the other site.

Old record: 48,031 November 10
New record: 53,535 November 14

New third place record was set on November 15, breaking the previous one set only four days before. Ann Dunham Nude Pics? was once again popular on the WordPress site. The Korean translations continued to go like gangbusters. Commissioning them was a great idea. This is extremely high traffic for a Sunday, usually the slowest day of the week.

Old record: 56,786 November 11
New record: 58,498 November 15

The Rational Element to White Nationalist Discourse

In the comments section, tulio notes that White Nationalists are not necessarily irrational. I agree that the project makes sense on a lot of levels. Agreeing with Alpha Unit, I simply state that it is both unworkable and more importantly immoral, or evil if you prefer. On Occidental Dissent there have been many discussions about how to implement their project. My Liberal Race Realism will not save the White race. I don’t intend that it should, as I don’t care about White extinction. Most other similar projects are also doomed.

In fact, putting their project in democratically via elections is also doomed, as is winning over a majority of Whites to their project. The only way to put their project in, as the webmaster of Occidental Dissent notes, is via an undemocratic project such as coup, seizure of power or  revolution. Then a dictatorship (authoritarian state) would need to be put in place because if the project were put up to vote, it would lose. I agree with this assessment. A fascist dictatorship is the only way to implement the WN project, and also, incredibly, to save the White race.

In addition, an authoritarian state would need to be implemented to input the more unsavory aspects of the WN project. Even the most moderate proposals involve a denial or rights to non-Whites living in the White state to encourage them to flee. Furthermore, miscegenation by Whites would be made illegal. You can guess what the more unsavory projects entail.

tulio notes that de facto White (and other) enclaves already exist:

Aren’t there already de-facto ethnic states in America? I’d say that whole area between Eastern Washington to the Dakotas and extending south to Northern Nevada and Utah is pretty much a de facto white ethnic state. As would be New England north of Boston. Los Angeles is pretty much Mexico City with a beach. Miami has been called “The Capital of Latin America”.

Atlanta is considered the “Black Mecca” amongst middle class black folks who are flocking there to be amongst people like themselves. I’d say there are already many ethnic territories in America, just not by law perhaps, but they exist.

Yes, but the WN argument, and once again it is rational, is that all of these places are doomed. Their argument is that Whites develop a place, make it a real nice place to live (by virtue mainly of there being mostly Whites living there) and then non-Whites (code as Blacks and Hispanics) move there to get away from the hoods that the Blacks and Hispanics have degraded or in some places destroyed. Even many Blacks and Hispanics often do not wish to live with their own kind in large numbers.

You could call this argument, Whites Create, Non-Whites Destroy (What Whites Created).

With Blacks, they are probably fleeing excessively Black hoods where well-behaved Blacks have had it with the bullshit. White areas are nice, low-crime and prosperous. Most of all safe. Blacks, when asked, prefer to live in a “diverse” hood, not in a Black community. Hispanics will probably just move to White areas because they are increasing in population and moving everywhere nowadays, possibly also for work. Hispanics don’t seem to mind living with their own that much, though once they get some money, you do see a bit of “Hispanic flight.”

The WN argument is that these very nice White areas soon start to decline as a result of large numbers of non-Whites move in, paradoxically to escape the places they have already destroyed. But with certain numbers, they will probably also recreate what they sought to escape. So the Whites are doomed. Everywhere they move, the non-Whites will follow and soon create degraded hoods that the Whites were seeking to flee in the first place.

At some point, there will be nowhere left to run. The Whites with money will move to Latin American like gated communities, while those without will be left to their own devices in the high crime diverse areas that most places have become. We do see something like this in Latin America.

Well, the WN’s are indeed onto something here, and as in so many ways, there is a large grain of truth to what they say.

I argue that WN is not just impractical but also immoral or evil, not necessarily that it is irrational, though its discourse necessarily contains many irrational arguments. Necessarily because any racist project or viewpoint is automatically irrational to some extent, since a rational view of race tends to lead away from hardcore racism.

"Just a Thought," by Alpha Unit

New Alpha Unit. I agree with everything she says here. This is one of the nutty things about the White nationalists – if you object to their racism, you must be a racist yourself! Truth is, it’s not particular to Whites. I have noticed this exact same response, often a furious one, when slamming away at Jewish racists, Turkish racists, Greek racists, Black racists, Hispanic racists, Arab racists, well, you name it.
Actually, all of these people were nationalists – Hispanic, Black, Greek, Turkish, Jewish and Arab nationalists. And this is when I started realizing that racism is just supernationalism and vice-versa, that it’s all really just human tribalism, and that none of it really adds up to logical or reasonable behavior. So, really, extreme human tribalism, ultranationalism and the racism that goes along are just part of a similar cake baked with human irrationality.
It’s sort of a mental disorder, and it has common symptoms no matter which tribe it manifests in. Which is one of the reasons I’m increasingly dubious about ethnic nationalism of any kind – it seems like it destroys brain cells and makes you stupid. The ethnic nationalist, as AU notes, is so caught up in their mental disorder that they usually can’t even see how nuts they are. All of us humans are probably subject to this mental illness, and the tendency to go nuts like this is probably genetic, though it can be overcome on an individual basis.
Actually, Alpha Unit came to me. She started to writing to me, angrily at first, then she started calming down. I noticed that she wrote well and suggested that she could write for me. She’s been a closeted writer her whole life, and this was her first chance to get published. The invitation to be a guest poster here has actually been extended to a number of other people, but few have taken me up. We have very high standards here, but AU made the cut.
A racist is someone who talks back to racists. This is one of the things I’ve learned since being here.
Before I started writing here, I read a lot of the comments that racists and White nationalists had been leaving here (and elsewhere). There weren’t a whole lot of people objecting to a lot of the stuff they were saying in this free speech zone.
So I came along and started ridiculing the racists. And guess what – I got accused of being a racist! It’s okay to say all kinds of demeaning things about Black people – that’s not racism, that’s just free speech. But let a Black person come along and point out how ridiculous you are, and that Black person is anti-White. She’s racist.
Do some of you people even think before you start typing? Do you really think nobody will notice your contradictions and your dissembling? I guess you’ve gotten away with it for so long that you’ve convinced yourselves that what you say makes perfect sense.
Well, it doesn’t. What you say doesn’t make any sense. Whether you’re talking about separating into some all-White nation somewhere in America, whether you’re talking about the Jews and how they’re responsible for everything you don’t like in the world – you’re not making any sense.
And now you want to be mad at me. Well, don’t waste your time. I didn’t make you say it. I didn’t arrange it so that you wouldn’t be able to defend it.
Maybe some of you are just sheep in wolves’ clothing.

“Just a Thought,” by Alpha Unit

New Alpha Unit. I agree with everything she says here. This is one of the nutty things about the White nationalists – if you object to their racism, you must be a racist yourself! Truth is, it’s not particular to Whites. I have noticed this exact same response, often a furious one, when slamming away at Jewish racists, Turkish racists, Greek racists, Black racists, Hispanic racists, Arab racists, well, you name it.

Actually, all of these people were nationalists – Hispanic, Black, Greek, Turkish, Jewish and Arab nationalists. And this is when I started realizing that racism is just supernationalism and vice-versa, that it’s all really just human tribalism, and that none of it really adds up to logical or reasonable behavior. So, really, extreme human tribalism, ultranationalism and the racism that goes along are just part of a similar cake baked with human irrationality.

It’s sort of a mental disorder, and it has common symptoms no matter which tribe it manifests in. Which is one of the reasons I’m increasingly dubious about ethnic nationalism of any kind – it seems like it destroys brain cells and makes you stupid. The ethnic nationalist, as AU notes, is so caught up in their mental disorder that they usually can’t even see how nuts they are. All of us humans are probably subject to this mental illness, and the tendency to go nuts like this is probably genetic, though it can be overcome on an individual basis.

Actually, Alpha Unit came to me. She started to writing to me, angrily at first, then she started calming down. I noticed that she wrote well and suggested that she could write for me. She’s been a closeted writer her whole life, and this was her first chance to get published. The invitation to be a guest poster here has actually been extended to a number of other people, but few have taken me up. We have very high standards here, but AU made the cut.

A racist is someone who talks back to racists. This is one of the things I’ve learned since being here.

Before I started writing here, I read a lot of the comments that racists and White nationalists had been leaving here (and elsewhere). There weren’t a whole lot of people objecting to a lot of the stuff they were saying in this free speech zone.

So I came along and started ridiculing the racists. And guess what – I got accused of being a racist! It’s okay to say all kinds of demeaning things about Black people – that’s not racism, that’s just free speech. But let a Black person come along and point out how ridiculous you are, and that Black person is anti-White. She’s racist.

Do some of you people even think before you start typing? Do you really think nobody will notice your contradictions and your dissembling? I guess you’ve gotten away with it for so long that you’ve convinced yourselves that what you say makes perfect sense.

Well, it doesn’t. What you say doesn’t make any sense. Whether you’re talking about separating into some all-White nation somewhere in America, whether you’re talking about the Jews and how they’re responsible for everything you don’t like in the world – you’re not making any sense.

And now you want to be mad at me. Well, don’t waste your time. I didn’t make you say it. I didn’t arrange it so that you wouldn’t be able to defend it.

Maybe some of you are just sheep in wolves’ clothing.