Where Do Citrus Fruits Come From?

I always wondered where these things grow wild, but it turns out that most of the cultivated varieties except one are hybrids. Some are ancient hybrids and others are more modern hybrids.
Where do oranges, mandarin oranges, limes, grapefruits, tangerines and lemons ultimately come from for the most part (not including the modern hybrids)?
Which one of these – orange, mandarin orange, lime, grapefruit, tangerine, lemon – is actually a wild growing plant (and is actually one of the origin plants for the cultivated varieties)?
Name the four wild plants that all of the cultivated varieties derive from (hard question).
Name the two types of cultivated limes. Which is an ancient plant and which is a modern hybrid?
Which two are modern modern hybrids: orange, lemon, grapefruit, mandarin orange, or tangerine?

It's the Damn Bars' Fault!

Jason Y writes:

I figure Robert was bullied by the Black students, just as the teacher in Louisiana probably was. I don’t think being lazy would be enough reason to develop hatred toward a group.

I was bullied a few times, but I am a hard person to bully because I am so psycho. I fight back way too much, so people just don’t bully me very much.
The commenter is correct that I could care less that the kids refused to work. That never bothered me al that much.
I stated to dislike them because way too many of them acted like shit, that’s why.
I would like to point out one more thing about this endless antiracist dodge the commenter is engaging in here. He keeps reiterating that people don’t like Blacks because they had negative experiences with them or were bullied by them. Ok fine, but why doesn’t this apply to other ethnic groups as well? And furthermore, why do so many perfectly nice non-Blacks seem to mysteriously have so many bad experiences with Black people.
Have you noticed that a Hell of a lot of people who have a lot of exposure to Blacks end up not liking them a whole lot?! What does that say about Black people? That humans in general are raciss?
The situation with Blacks is like the guy who keeps getting thrown out of every bar in town and then complains it’s all down to some weird mysterious prejudice. “They got it in for me!” It’s not anything he did in the bars. Oh no! It’s just some weird, mysterious hatred for no reason bullshit. Most people would say the problem is you, not the bars you got thrown out of.
That’s the situation for Blacks – blaming the people who aren’t real keen on Blacks for their opinions and then blaming them again for all of Blacks’ subsequent behavior is like blaming all the bars in town for throwing the guy out over and over. And now he’s acting awful, and it’s all because of the mean, evil, scum bar owners who picked on him for no damn reason! Oh boo hoo! Bad, mean bar owners! Bad people! They’re so mean! Boo! Hiss!

Unconditional Positive Regard in Anthropology and Psychology

William writes:

I suspect it has to do with Robert’s Anthropologist-ish background, it seems like you guys have a deep respect for basically any people capable of civilization at all/ have a deeper appreciation for it.

Correct, I have worked as a Cultural Anthropologist. I sort of fake my way into most of my jobs – I get a bunch of books on how to do it read them or I call up people who work in the field and ask them how to do the job. Then just go be an impostor. I remember when I boned up for the job, the books I read said that if you were going to be an anthropologist and work with an ethnic group, one thing you had to do was to accept the ethnic group in toto, and that meant you had to accept every single one of their behaviors and cultural practices. That’s the only way to do ethnographic work.
If you dislike some of the group’s beliefs, behaviors or practices, it can show up in your work with your informants, and if you don’t have a good relationship with your informants, you can’t get any good anthropological work done at all. Your informants will lie, play tricks on you, make up jokes about what they believe and do and all sorts of nonsense. Or they will just become hostile and refuse to cooperate much at all.
It’s sort an unconditional positive regard thing, a Rogersian way of doing anthropology.
Speaking of which, I also work in mental health, and I believe in Rogers’ Unconditional Positive Regard model here too. Too many therapists don’t, and I believe as a result, they do lousy therapy. I accept all of my clients in toto and generally don’t have any negative attitudes about any of them. Of course it helps that most of my clients are very good people. I don’t have to work with lousy or bad people as clients. I guess it’s difficult.
Also I am still a liberal at heart. That never left me. If your heart is still on the Left, it’s hard to get all that racist no matter how awful X group or race acts. Though Gypsies would definitely try my patience!

"In Black and White," by Phil

As a guest author, I’ve figured for a while that I would either plan or be forced for my sanity to write an article focusing my “politics”, having more faith in the latter.
The lack of clarity regarding them has, to my disadvantage, sparked claims or suspicions of me being a White Supremacist in disguised or bordering such ideology despite being Black. Though when repeatedly queried, said accusers couldn’t cite a legit case of me showing clear, non-statistical or subjective bias against Blacks (consistent with my actual politics to be mentioned further on).
At the same time, regulars in the comment section such as William or Tulio have expressed curiosity in whatever “path” has drawn me to my current thoughts. These questions caused me to drift back towards my own agenda in HBD towards a recurring dilemma dating since my initial exposure to modern research of racial differences. Both challenged and conflicted, I’ve decided to devote time and energy into a subject matter that I’ve found, honestly, was not even that clear to me prior to typing this.

Why I’m not a online “Stormer”
1. I have a deep intolerance towards self-hate. Being blunt with shortcomings of your background and reflecting it in your character is one thing, but complaining about it to the point where you reject your own and try to emulate another group is rather pathetic and treacherous to me regardless of one’s race or culture . With that said, it became apparent to me that many people have had experiences where they witness these shortcomings up front with a profound effect that forces them out of it, ones I’ve never had. Regardless, I’m not ignorant of “Negro vices,” and I’ll address that afterwards.
2. Even if I wanted to, I couldn’t commit to a “new White identity”. This is largely due to me having physical traits that obviously wouldn’t pass the “Ubermensch” test, which is to be expected when I’m about 82-84% Black. My only features that deviate me from the typical “Negro” look would be my skin tone, head size, and some isolated facial features, and even then, they could still be within a typical range in certain subgroups. Second would be mental and personality traits.
3. Though we could argue the extent of the stereotypes in their general application to Blacks, I’m simply going to point out the ones that apply to me. One would be laziness, which had actually cost me a semester of Advanced Calculus, but I’ve fortunately managed to make it up. Another match would be my emotion. Often I find myself invested in sadness, excitement, anger, and ponderousness for little or no reason. The third would be how simplified I try to make my daily activities, often in favor of my own leisure. There may be more, but I these traits pretty much match with what one would read from such titles such as Among the Ibos by G. T. Basden. Even then, I don’t actually hate myself as much as I discourage these tendencies in me.
4. As far as mental differences goes, what separates me from other Blacks is my lack of a gregarious nature, being more inclined to individualism. While it often results in me having more White friends, it doesn’t actually correlate with me having a deep desire to be White.
5. I hate Black-bashing with a passion. Criticism, sure, but modern Internet-Nazi mantra makes my blood boil more than reading Europeans in the past actually comparing Blacks to apes. That reason is because, as blunt as they were, the early Europeans could articulate that intelligently and others even tried to give better context to it, one I remember rejecting it in favor of “Paleolithic Man”. Needless to say, the type of Black- bashers that anger me are little like these early explorers.

Why I Bother with HBD

As said before, I have an agenda like most who acknowledge race realism. Before even researching the specifics, I thought that I could use my knowledge and experiences of personal vices that hold people back, making me an efficient adviser and communicator towards individuals that could use my help. Particularly, ones like my cousin Zachary who failed high school, has no job, and has a record for burglary.
At face value, I have no good reason to help him. While I barely know him and once when he visited me, he treated me like crap, my mother who cared about him when he was younger has already accepted his current fate, and currently his father has had enough and kicked him out after years of caring (and admittedly spoiling) him. The real reason I want to help him can be found when you look deeper into the situation.
When he respected my mother when he was younger, she was likely placeholder for his mother who barely acknowledged. Being both updated in his habits and having experience in knowing “real” thugs, she asserts that Zachary wasn’t one. She explains how a thug at his luck would be selling dope or on the streets or whatever crime to get by, but Zachary isn’t hardened like them and he only hangs out with them for “face”. He hadn’t done much else since the one burglary, leading me to suspect he did it out of peer pressure.
Instead he has been borrowing money and making empty promises of either school or work, really never sticking to anything. More evidence for his non-thug nature is that he actually does want to invest in his son, but currently the mother and her family are trying to find a “sugar daddy” to support the mother.
As far as I see it, my cousin is in a position where the Left isn’t actually going to the tackle his issues, and the Right wouldn’t even bother. It makes me stop and wonder how many are like him. With that said, I’m not stupid. While lacking in real life experience, reports from others now and in the past have given me a clear idea of dangers in engaging this too lightly. Unlike the active Left, I don’t generalize the situation of unfortunate Blacks from  my cousin’s plight. I use HBD to understand my limitations and reassess my goals.

Am I Smart Because I’m Part White?

While I find my partly White background it a likely contributor, I would like to point out regardless that I’m more of the “sloppy Black genius” Robert has written about in the past. To roughly understand my psychology, I’ll refer to my personality type and trends in behavior of different Black tribes that would be likely candidates.
INFP’s tend to improvise more than plan, like blacks when “nigger-rigging” as Robert once elaborated. INFP’s are also have bias towards feelings and are led by virtues. While blacks have been noted to be somewhat endowed in observing emotions, how to actually consider them and respond with intuition was noted to be a separate skill. I’m unsure if this would be due to IQ or personality, likely both because I believe this would be a common vice in extroversion. Still, I wouldn’t pass off a Black component, which could be likely in my case.
Certain Blacks, like the Krumen or the Eboe, were noted for a more gentle nature than other Blacks during slavery, Eboes in particular being prone to suicide (an extreme extroverted trait). The latter were wanted for tobacco plantations, and as luck would find it, my mother’s side (where I owe my introversion) were tobacco sharecroppers, and my admixture results have me as 30% Nigerian, the largest single ethnicity out of all my ancestry results. On top of that, I’m rather sure both tribes had a form of a “mediator” as well as being noted for their fidelity, basically fitting a INFP caricature.
My father’s side is where I get my analytical skills. While my father is light skinned with a flatter face and more pointed nose than me, those are the only remotely White things about him. His cranial and body shape and other facial features are “Negro”. I suppose he would either fit the Congolese Bantu or Senegambian background. I would say likely Senegambian due to foresight, traditionalism and organization which overlap with some Bantus.
He’s not really that sensitive, which actually is a rather common thing in Black tribes aside from Eboes sand Krumen. This spawns from a combination of extroversion and logic such that he is not much of a feeler. He somewhat reminds me of a pastoralist in facial appearance and character, like a Tuareg or Fulani. I would say that he emulates some White Southerner traits right off the bat though, but I’m unsure if that’s through admixture or selection for certain traits when adapting to Southern society. Maybe a paternal lineage, like the pastoralists that were already mentioned.
So in summary, my White ancestry would play as a boost to latent traits which likely may come from certain Black backgrounds since I’m 82% Black. Another mechanism may be outbreeding, which increases individualism, if not “Whiteness” itself. If I knew my father’s specific components, I may have a better picture. As well I would encourage any info from Jm8 on behaviors of African tribes.

Socialists Are Generally Elitist, and That's Ok

Oops I did it again writes:

What socialists are not “elitist”? Aside from the “revolutionary masses”, all those who fancy leading/instructing them are and must be “elitists”.
It’s people who need a mission, something that will make them heroes, and are too intelligent to find that kind of gratification doing jobs even for 120 IQ people.

Of course this is true. It’s always been true. It’s surely true with Leninists and Communists. It always bothered me that Communist Party membership was limited to say, 6% of society. Every time I saw that, I felt pained. Why only 6%? How can you ever limit party membership to such a low number without that 6% becoming an elite in fact if not in essence? Assuming a person is sufficiently revolutionary, why can’t they join the party? And if they start lagging or going reactionary, just pull their membership. No problem there. Communists aren’t exactly democrats anyway.
Are the masses really that stupid and unaware of their own needs that only the top 6% of society is capable of addressing those needs, as 94% of them are class cucks who will always oppose their own interests?
If you read early Marxists, they were quite clear that the masses didn’t know what the Hell they were doing, had no idea of what their needs or even wants were, and were very easily swayed to support their class enemies on the basis of nationalism, jingoism, tribalism, racism, sexism, values conservatism, or religion.
They had no idea what they were doing and were incapable of figuring out what was best for them, so a paternalistic yet benevolent socialist elite (vanguard) was needed to show them the way. Granted, that may be the case, but it always seemed insulting towards the masses.
And even after years or decades of Communism, the masses are still as retarded as ever? After all those revolutionary classes and sessions, and they haven’t transformed in the slightest? That seemed so dubious to me.
The Chavistas, Sandinistas and others were trying to get away from that. I believe anyone can join the Sandinista Party, and members were often poor urban workers or peasants. The FMLN party in El Salvador is the same. Both of those parties managed to sell their project very well to the masses. Of course they were helped by decades of ruling class brutality and dictatorship that showed even the most blind of the masses that the ruling classes could never possibly be their friends in any formation or guise.
The Chavistas in Venezuela are much the same. In fact, the party itself is a grassroots party such that the grassroots nearly control the party direction, and those at the top are nearly beholden to those at the bottom, a complete transformation of typical human political relations, or probably of typical human relations in just about anything for that matter.
That’s not quite Direct Democracy, but it’s getting awful close.

The Initiative Process and the Perversion of Direct Democracy

Direct Democracy is supposed to be the fairest type of grassroots democracy. Yet I feel that absent extensive education of the masses, Direct Democracy is often a polished turd.
The US initiative process is a good example of Direct Democracy perverted. The initiative process in the US is Direct Democracy, but the results are as often pro-ruling class as against, which is not how you would expect the masses to vote. One problem is that the initiative process was hijacked in recent years by large corporations and the rich.
The initiative process was initiated in the early 1900’s as a way of fighting such malign institutions as Standard Oil and the Southern Pacific Railroad. These corporations had such a deadly grip on the US political process and media that they nearly ruled the country. Nothing could be done about them. The only way to challenge this Dictatorship of the Monopoly Corporations was via direct vote by the citizenry. The initiative process hence was began as a progressive process of taking issues directly to the people to challenge corporate and ruling class power when the other branches of government were too controlled by Class Power to limit it in any way. The initiative process was a reform process.
Perversely, this progressive reform via Direct Democracy was by the end of the century largely taken over by the ruling class and especially the large corporations, the very things that the process was put in to fight against.

Do Jews Run The Internet?


Gay State Girl: Susan Wojicicki has a Polish Catholic father and a Jewish mother. Her sister Ann Wojicicki (Mrs Google) is married to Sergei Brin and runs the Biotech firm 23andme, promising to analyze people’s genetic profile for a low cost but does not say how she intends to use their profiles in the future.
William: A European half-Jew marrying a gentile (Italian?) is not exactly quintessentially Jewish…at least in the sense of someone like Ben Shapiro (the gold standard)

First of all, it’s the Goldberg Standard, dammit, not the Gold Standard. Jews 101.
Both Susan Wojicicki and Ann Wojicicki (Mrs Google) are Jews.
If your mother is a Jew, you are a Jew. I mean come on, that’s Jews 101 again. Did the commenter flunk?

Gay State Girl: is married to Sergei Brin

Mr. Brin is a member of the Russian Mafia, I mean he is a Russian Jew, excuse me.
Let’s look at the evidence:

  • Susan Wojicicki, founder of Jewtube. JEW!
  • Ann Wojicicki, married to Sergey Brin, founder of Jewgle. JEW!
  • Ann Wojicicki, vampiress runs 23andme, steals your blood and collects your genetic data for nefarious purposes. JEW!
  • Sergey Brin, founder of Jewgle. JEW!

*This post is not really serious. Joke post.

When the Common Sense View Is Just Wrong

RL: Granted these were tough concepts, and the concretist way of thinking seemed intuitively correct for most of these concepts, but of course it was wrong. The concretist view was usually something like, “What a stupid idea! This means nothing at all! Dumbest idea I’ve ever heard! It makes no sense! Completely irrational!” You had to stretch your brain quite a bit to figure out why the abstract view of the situation was actually the correct one and that the idea indeed had some merit.
Oops I did it again: I wonder how the thing people are best at is describing their selves in picturing what they believe be others.

This is so true! There are quite a few notions out there where the common sense view is, “Hey look, well, looking at this situation, obviously the truth is X = Y.” Or something along those lines.
“Well of course!…Obviously!…It must be…That’s simple…”.
The problem is that in these cases the logical, common sense POV is just…guess what? Wrong. It’s wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
What’s the truth? The truth is actually found by looking at the question from an abstract and non-concretist and hopefully as objective view as possible. When we do that, we find that the truth is actually something completely counterintuitive.
Too many people think in a concretist way. There’s nothing wrong with that as long as the concretist view is correct, and often it is. Where we run into problems is where the concretist view is just wrong and the only path to the correct answer is via the abstract view.
When one resigns oneself to concretist thinking all the time, you have stated that you are defeated by adulthood and that you will be an 11 year old forever. That is because 11 years old is the end of concrete relations. If you wonder why 12 year old girls seem so different from 11 year old girls (and I have noticed how brilliant these little 12 year old’s are), it is because the 12 year old girl is now taking her baby steps into the world of abstraction.
Abstraction versus concreteness are two very different ways of thinking, of looking at the world. The reason that abstraction begins at age 12 is because this is an adult mode of thinking. Concretion, while often charming and humorous, is a child’s way of looking at the world. Perhaps children benefit from concreteness, or more likely, perhaps it simply takes that slow-maturing brain of ours 12 full years to mature to the state of Abstractness.
My father had a 129 IQ, but he was surprisingly concrete for such a smart guy in the top 4% of the intelligence bracket. There were certain things that I tried to explain to him over and over like Zen philosophy or proportional voting.
Proportional voting is a bit tricky to get around (you vote for 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices which are counted differently depending on outcomes), but my Mom and brother were able to get it after a bit. My father could never get it.
He could never get the controversy over software patents either. A software patent is intellectual property – it’s like patenting an idea. A novelist writes a few paragraphs about this or that. Sure, the exact word structure is copywritten, though it can be copied easily by shifting some words around. But the novelist cannot copyright the idea that he came up with that is expressed in that section. Sartre could not patent Existentialism. A software patent is like that novelist patenting those three paragraphs he wrote. How can you do that? You can’t.
How about patenting the idea of making a window pop up on your screen? How can you do that? That’s like patenting the idea of Postmodernism. You can’t patent software. That’s patenting ideas. My father thought I was arguing against patents or copyrights. He never could get the argument.
Zen was hopeless. All he did was pound the table over and over again. “What’s the point?! What the point of Zen Buddhism?!” Well obviously if you take that idea to any Zen monk, assuming he answers the question at all and doesn’t answer by saying, “Go sweep your floor now,” or something like that, an honest Zen master will simply say that the point of Zen is that there is no point. That’s Zen in a nutshell. There’s nothing there at all, and that is the whole point, if there is even a point at all, which is pretty up in the air itself.

Another Way of Looking at IQ: Extra-IQ Factors

RL: Incidentally, two of the brightest commenters on my blog had IQ’s of 113 and 117. The 117 IQ guy was fantastic at philosophy and other forms of abstract thinking. The other fellow was into genetics and anthropology, but he thought in much the same way. A few of these types are so bright that you almost think that their score is wrong. I am not sure what is going on except maybe they are working their brains extra hard, or they have filled their brains up with all sorts of goodies.
Oops I did it again: Myers-Briggs (Jungian) type, life experiences, economic status, degree of neuroticism (“Work their wits hard”), the brain faculty we call “sensitivity”, the other we call “fantasy”, all are factors.

This is so correct. Jim Flynn wrote a book the premise of which was something like “factors above and beyond IQ.” He showed how 1st and 2nd Generation Northeast Asians in the US (mostly Japanese and Chinese) were often working at jobs up that usually required IQ’s 20 points above their level. In other words, a 100 IQ Japanese-American would be functioning on the job at the same level as a typical 120 IQ ordinary American. In other words, the NE Asians might have an IQ of 100, but on his on the job performance was the same as someone with a 120 IQ.
Flynn called these “extra-IQ factors.” In other words, on the job, IQ isn’t everything. I forget what the extra-IQ factors were but they seemed to be things like punctuality, responsibility, resilience, psychological stability, regular attendance, studiousness, reliability, seriousness, conscientiousness, hard working nature, and stick-to-it-iveness or what some are now calling “grit” which boils down to “if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again,” or continuing to hammer away at a problem even after repeated failure – not giving up.
So you see there are personality factors that you can add to your IQ score so you perform at a higher level than your IQ would predict.
I was thinking of this in terms of Blacks, that maybe Blacks could cultivate some extra-IQ factors that would allow them to overcome some of their disadvantage due to lower average IQ. If an 85 IQ Black person could function on the job at the same level as we expect a 105 IQ person to perform at, I think the position of Blacks in the US could improve a lot. Unfortunately the wort of things that were helping the NE Asians were sort of “nerd factors, square factors, uptight factors” that Blacks just don’t seem to do well in, mostly because they look down on this sort of excessive seriousness.
Nevertheless, I am open to the idea of harnessing extra-IQ factors in Blacks to help them to perform better in school and work. Harnessing what seems to be their innate social skills and extroversion might be one of these things.
Myers-Briggs or Jungian personality type: Yes, certain personality types might help one perform above their IQ level.
Life experiences: Correct. Certain types of life experiences and lessons learned and skills gained from them could help push you above your IQ level.
Economic status: Yes, a higher economic status might help you to perform above your IQ level.
Degree of neuroticism or working their wits hard: Correct. Someone who pushes their brain into overdrive and characteristically pushes their mind and intellect to its limits in an almost challenge-testing near-athletic competitive manner could surely perform above their IQ level. I think I have seen some examples of this in my life.
Sensitivity as a brain factor: I could see how this would help you perform above your IQ level, but I am wondering just what this factor is.
Fantasy as a brain factor: If this means something like creativeness or open mindedness or the tendency to think outside the box, I could see how this would help you.

Another Way of Looking at IQ – the Importance of Subtest Scores

RL: A 115 IQ is absolutely enough to graduate from college, and most of them do. Is it enough to get an advanced degree? I would say that it is enough to get a Master’s Degree, but at that range, getting a PhD might be a challenge, and at the very least, they would have to work very hard for it.
Oops I did it again: Are we talking of Black-Studies and Social Work Ph.D.’s? :)) Jokes aside…A mindful person wants a Ph.D if they can be real researchers.
My IQ is 115-125 (different scores at different times, but on average: 110 spatial, 125 numerical/logic, 130/135 verbal), I could have achieved a Ph.D., but I would have felt it was “fake” or just a title to boast.

This commenter is absolutely brilliant and is one of the better commenters we have had here in a while. With a 120 IQ, he readily quotes Heidigger and Schopenhauer (!) and generally seems to “get it” more than many of my other commenters – for instance, he was the only one who seemed to figure out the post on Heidigger and surface and deep meanings of objects.
A 120 IQ gets put down too much on this site. We have some commenters in that range lamenting that their IQ’s are not very high. Come off it. Keep in mind that if you have a 120 IQ, you are in the top 10% of the IQ range. Ten people in a room? You are smarter than everyone in the room, all nine of them. I do not know about the rest of you, but I would love to be in the top 10% of just about any positive category.
But I think what we are really looking at here in this commenter is the 132 verbal IQ. That is truly kick-ass. He is in the Gifted range of Verbal IQ or the top 2% of the population. Based on verbal IQ only, he is smart enough to get into Mensa.
So the reason this 120 IQ fellow seems to be so brilliant is not so much that there is something special about his 120 IQ or that he has all sorts of extra-IQ factors going, but instead it is all wrapped up in that 132 verbal IQ that is part of the 120 score.
It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to look at whole IQ scores. It’s probably more reasonable to look at the specific IQ breakdowns on the subtests to get the true whole picture of the individual’s intelligence.

Girls and Women, Boys and Men, and Girl-women and Boy-men

oops I did it again writes:

All objects have surface meanings and deep meanings. The deep meaning is the true meaning of what the object is.
I am fine with that, as long as it’s acknowledged that both meanings (let’s think a little about the word “meaning”, shall we? Meaning a bridge… meaning it’s a connection between our mind and the unreachable object of your knowledge; meaning is not what is at the other end of the bridge, but the bridge) are constructs of our mind, just like the verb “to be”, and the ideas of truthfulness and falsity (let’s say it: all what we can think).
Instead of to Heidegger for details on what sets girls and women apart from each other, I point you to Schopenhauer, and Hindu sapience, for some sobering humility and sense of one’s own proportions, if I say so. (Read “you” as in “you, Western civilization of the last 18 centuries”. A very plural pronoun.)

I wrote the post because I work as a mental health counselor. I have quite a few clients who get very upset at the fact that they get turned on by young teenage girls. Like age 14 or so. I was given photos of these girls to look at, and I almost fell over laughing. I told the clients, “That’s not a girl. That’s a woman! She turns you on because she looks like a woman, or in a sense, she simply is a woman.”
Why does a man get aroused by a 14 year old that looks like a woman? Because his brain looks at it and the brain thinks, “woman” because, let’s face it, the brain does not work very well by thinking, “Hey wait a minute. That is only the optical illusion of a woman. That is not a real woman because of ‘years lived’ or some weird statistic like that. Therefore she does not turn me on because I only get turned on by statistics like ‘years lived’.”
Hell no!
Your brain looks at that and if it looks like a woman, your brain screams, “Woman!” and it turns you on, just like that.
You argue for the other definition, that is she is not a woman due to her mind. In the mind, the teenage girl is not a little girl. But she is also not a woman. If you spend a lot of time around them as I have, you will see that yes, it is a woman, very, very much so, in some important ways. But in some other ways, it is still a pretty silly girl. It’s not a woman at all. So it’s neither a woman nor a girl, but something in between, or it’s both a woman and a girl at the same time.
Personally, I call them girl-women, and I call teenage boys boy-men.
I remember when we were in high school, the teachers habitually addressed as “young men” and “young women.” This felt very respectful to me, and I knew deep down inside that it was correct. It is very insulting to high school students boys and girls. It’s very demeaning, and it’s not even correct. I remember when I was 16 and 17 years old. I am not sure exactly what I felt like, but I do know that I sure didn’t feel like that boy that I had been for so many years up until maybe age 13 or so! Teenage boys are young men. Teenage girls are young women. This is the old fashioned way in which we referred to them for hundreds of years here in our country and it was not wrong.
Is it a man? Not really. “Young man” means something like “becoming a man.” The phrase young woman means something like “becoming a woman.” They are on the road, transitioning. But are they children? Hell no! For females, children are what we call “little girls.” If it’s not a little girl, it’s not a child. Period. A teenage girl is not really a little girl, though a 13 year old girl can come close. So it’s not a child. Maybe it’s not an adult either yet, but it sure as Hell isn’t a little girl for Chrissake.
Does your brain look at a 14 year old girl who looks like a woman and think, “Oh no! That doesn’t turn me on because it has the brain of a girl! It thinks like a girl, so it doesn’t turn me on.”? Hell no! The brain does not work that way. The brain doesn’t get turned on by a female or not based on how she thinks. The brain gets turned on by a female based on how she looks or appears.

Another ISIS Attack in France!

Two Islamists armed with knives invaded a Catholic Church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray in Normandy, slitting the throat of an 86 year old priest and taking some nuns hostage. In addition to the martyred priest, a male churchgoer was very seriously wounded in the attack and is fighting for his life. Police surrounded the church. The two attackers came out of the church and were shot dead by police. A third man was arrested outside the church in connection with the attack. The attackers claimed the attack in the name of ISIS.
Jesus, these Islamic global jihad terrorism attacks are coming just about every day now.

Two More Cops Shot!

Good God, cops are getting shot just about every day now on average.
One in Indianapolis and one in Watts. In Watts, police were called to Nickerson Gardens and interrupted a shooting in progress. One cop got shot, and the gunman was killed. The killer was quite possibly Black.
In Indianapolis, a man was stopped for a traffic stop and then took off on a wild high speed chase. In the course of the chase, he shot at cops, wounding one. Another cop was injured in some unknown manner but not by gunshot. The dead man is a young Black man with long dreadlocks.
I have been to Nickerson Gardens before. It is not a pretty place. Watts is truly the heart of the ghetto. As bad as you think the ghetto is, the very heart of the ghetto is where it is the worst of all. I also noticed that the Blacks in very heart of the ghetto seem to be darker-skinned than in the rest of the ghetto. It is not unusual to see Blacks in Watts who are so dark that their skin is almost blue.Ghetto Blacks are not all that friendly anyway, but the ones in the heart of the ghetto really, really hate Whites.The deeper you go into the ghetto, the ore the hate Whites and in the very heart of the ghetto, the White-hatred is so hot it’s almost about to catch fire. You can feel it in your bones, from both the students and even in some of the teachers. Just pure, sheer, utter hate.
Watts is a scary place. I taught there for only one day, and some Blacks disabled my car battery. But this really cool Black Auto Shop teacher fixed it for me. The Black administrators in Watts are really cool. They know it’s hopeless and they are more or less kicking back, holding down the fort and enjoying the show. Teaching students there was hopeless. I substituted for one class and they kept making excuses to get up and go to the bathroom. Then they would never come back. One after the other. Then I got mad and would not let anyone leave anymore. So the students would just stand up and walk out the back door of the class. Then I caved in and said I would let them out on break. One after the other, they raised their hands with some bullshit excuse to leave class.It was literally a dog ate my homework type thing. It was pretty funny and after a while, I was almost doubled over in laughter when another one would raise their hand to be excused. I would just laugh and let them go. I tried to get them to do some work but they simply refused. Nothing was getting done anyway, why not just let them all go home, right? The whole day more or less went like that.

Mass Murder Attack on Disabled People in Japan!

A 26 year old man, Satoshi Uematsu, who used to work at a disabled facility called Tsukui-Yamamuri-en in the city of Sagamihara, Japan went back to his former workplace in the early morning hours armed with a knife and began attacking the physically and mentally disabled people in the center. When it was all over, he had murdered 19 people and wounded another 25. The dead ranged in age from 18 to 70.
He harbored the typical Japanese feeling of contempt, fear and shame towards to he disabled taken to an extreme. In February, he had hand-delivered letters to the offices of several Parliamentarians in which he threatened to kill hundreds of disabled people for the sake of Japan and urged legal changes that would enable disabled people who were unable to live at home and be active in society to be euthanized if their relatives agreed to it. He was hospitalized in a mental hospital for observation but was released after two weeks when it was determined that he was not a danger.
Japanese society is characterized by among other things an extreme form of ethnocentrism which White Nationalists actually praise and an attitude of contempt, fear and shame towards disabled people, who are virtually regarded as non-human.

Idiotic Cultural Left Insanity of the Day

Even a lot of lesbians hate this sort of nonsense, especially the more militant ones.
Now the truth is that I despise lesbian-feminists.
However, I will give these lesbian feminist bitches one thing. They say two thumbs down on the idea of lesbians marrying men. Why? Because they say it’s nuts, that’s why. They say the definition of lesbian means exclusively or predominately attracted to other women for romance and sex. That doesn’t necessarily preclude sex with men on occasion, but surely that is not what a lesbian prefers. And of course a lesbian would never marry a man. Why the Hell would she do that?
And what sort of a feminist man pussified idiot would marry a dyke anyway? I have heard of a few of these insane relationships. The men are often rad fem men. Yes, there is such a thing. These are men who hate other men, hate masculinity and think men are just evil in the way they treat women. They’re traitors to their brothers off consorting with the enemy, their sisters.
These pussies boy-men never learned one of the first rules of Man World that a boy learns in life: Bros before hos. Rad fem men are often very sissy and effeminate. Quite a few of them are gay men. They’re down with their sisters because these sissies identify with femininity. There are actually some very sissy straight men who are radfems. These are heterosexual men, but a lot of other males think they are gay, and they have been getting gay-baited and gay-bashed since school. There was one fellow that was writing on the web a while back who I actually enjoyed.
The radfem argument against these moronic “married lesbians” is quite simple If you are a “lesbian” who falls in love with men and marries men, guess what? That means you’re not a lesbian!
The Gay Politics crowd has always been one of the nuttier wings of the Cultural Left because, well, let’s get real here for a moment. Although healthy homosexuals (especially biologically gay men) definitely exist, any sane person who has studied the gay community for any length of time has to realize that a lot of gay people are crazy, weird, and bizarre.

Lesbian Feminism 101

You know what lesbian feminists are? Ever heard of them? Well if you have not, that I will give you a brief backgrounder on who and what they are. If you had the slightest inkling of what that word means, you really need to hate them too. If you don’t hate lesbian feminists, you’re either one of them or there is something very wrong with you, or I don’t want to know you because you’re my enemy.
I don’t really have the time to go into it by now, but more or less by definition, a lesbian feminist is absolutely not born that way. She’s not a born lesbian. If she’s born anything at all, she’s born straight. I am sympathetic to biological lesbians, and I have met a few, but lesbian feminists? Um, no. As a simple explanation, I will just say that these are women who have 100% chosen to be lesbians out of their own free will.
And why did they choose to be idiotic dykes? Because they hate us men more than any other bitches on this planet, that’s why. They hate us so much that they don’t want to engage in romance and sex with us, and beyond that, a lot of them don’t even want to have anything to do with us at all.
There is a fairly large section of the lesbian community that supports lesbian separatism, which is an apartheid like ideology not unlike White nationalism, Zionism, Nazism, etc. They actually want to live their lives seeing and dealing with us men as little as possible because that is just how much they utterly despise us. What did we ever do to them?
Well you will have to check into your nearest university’s Women’s Studies Department and enroll in some Gender Studies classes and get back to us. These feminists are the female version of MGTOW. It’s like the Manosphere, except with misandry instead of misogyny. The MRA tard says the whole problem with the world is women, and the lesbian feminist tard says the whole problem with the world is men.
Guess what? They’re both full of shit. And not only that, but they are very much like each other. Perhaps some MRA’s and MGTOW’s ought to hook with some of these lesbian feminist bitches and get hooked. After all, they deserve each other. In fact, the polar opposite of an MRA is not a lesbian feminist – it’s a man who loves women or a woman who loves men. The opposite of a radfem is not an MRA – it’s a real woman who loves men and a normal guy who loves women. Those two tard groups only think they hate each other. Really they are just the opposite sides of the same damned mirror.

Mass Shooting in Fort Myers, Florida

Another one.
2 dead, 16 wounded outside the Club Blu Bar and Grill, a nightclub in Fort Myers, Florida. The two dead are 14 and 18 years old. A youth party for kids 12-17 called Swimsuit Glow Party was being held at the club. Parents were picking up their kids at the club when shots rang out. It appears that most of the kids at the club were Black. If that is so, the shooter(s) probably were too. There was a second shooting incident only a mile away from the club and another incident a few miles northeast of the club, where a persons of interest was detained. Three people have been detained in connection with the shooting.
It appears that the city has a large Black population and there is heavy gang warfare with a lot of shootings going on a regular basis, similar to Chicago or Baltimore. The shooting at the club may well have been gang related.
I can’t even keep track of these things anymore. They are just coming way too fast. Every day it seems like there is another one of these or some sort of an Islamic global jihad terrorist attack of some sort. The world is getting to be a very weird and scary place. When I was young in the 1970’s, I never thought the world would get this weird and scary.

Face Facts: Homosexuality and Transsexualism Are Not Normal

A lot of gay men act like women. A lot of lesbians act like men. Neither is normal behavior, face it. Many gay men even like to wear dresses. We call them drag queens. Lesbians typically wear men’s clothes and cut their hair short and mostly try to look ugly as sin.
The very state of being homosexual in and of itself is sort of a violation of the nature of gender, and as such, it is no secret that a longstanding goal of the gay community is “the elimination of gender.” Why? Because many homosexuals are “at war with the concept of gender.” Their war is all wrapped up in their homosexual status and identity. That’s why we are seeing all of these bizarre transsexual freak things or whatever they are. Things, its, heshes, call em what you will.
Let’s get real here too. This crap is not normal. If you’re a man, it is not normal to think that you are a woman. If you are a woman, it is not normal or healthy to think you are a man. In fact, in both cases, it is not even true! It can best be thought of as a delusion. It’s weird as Hell for a man to chop off his dick, grow tits and turn into a lady. It’s so weird it’s almost sci-fi weird. It’s straight up bonkers for a woman to turn her vagina inside out and turn it into a flopping dick while hacking off those lovely female breasts of hers. I would argue that that is not even surgery. It’s mutilation masquerading as surgery.
But you can see that the transsexuals are tied in with the gays. Transwomen and many gay men are at war with their biological gender. Transmen and most bull dykes are at war with their very own womanhood. Transwomen are surely at war with their own manhood. Most of these tranny cases are on a homosexual continuum. Most transwomen are best thought of as an extreme form of male homosexuality – sort of like drag queens that ran so fast towards the cliff that they fell off. The Ultragays. Most transmen are an extreme form of lesbianism – sort of the ultimate motorcycle bull dykes. The Superdykes. It sounds like a comic book series.

Fake Figures, Incorrect Theories and Lies about Venezuela

That 500% inflation for Venezuela in the current year is false. That’s the figure that been bandied about the lying US press. That comes from one very controversial IMF report. However, that report’s conclusions have been rejected by most other economists. A panel of 12 economists agreed that the true figure for Venezuela’s economy this year is ~150%. That’s pretty bad, but it’s not 500%.
The figures on exchange rates are wrong. One government dollar does not equal 80 black market dollars. That exchange rate is only for money the government gives to importers to import goods from abroad.
The importers want those dollars cheap like that, that’s why the government gives them out so cheaply. This belies the arguments that the government rate does not begin to even cover costs because the companies will have to buy the goods at the black market rate overseas. That’s just not so. The government gives those dollars out cheaply as an incentive for the importers. If it was such a horrible deal, they would not give the dollars so cheaply.
The official exchange rate is 400 bolivars to the dollar. The black market rate is 1,000 bolivars to the dollar. So the black market rate is only 2.5X the official rate, which is hot nearly as bad as I had thought.
Many products are readily available and have been since the start of the shortages. The shortages are mostly of staples and sanitary necessities. For instance, milk is always in very short supply, but cheese and yogurt have been readily available since the start of the shortages.
Coffee beans are very difficult to buy in the stores. However, on every street corner is a little store or cafe where you can buy a cup of coffee, so coffee itself is obviously not in short supply. It’s just that the beans are not being sold to retail markets for sale on grocery shelves. If businesses can’t recoup their costs on sales of goods, how come they can apparently recoup their costs easily on yogurt and cheese but not on milk? How come they can recoup their costs just fine selling coffee beans to retail coffee shops that sell cups of coffee but they can’t recoup their costs on coffee beans sold to grocery stores. That makes no sense at all.
Studies have shown that food producers are producing just as much food in total numbers as before the shortages. So the argument that producers cannot recoup costs hence they have stopped manufacturing and importing things cannot be true because if it were true, food production would have plummeted. If total food production is as high now as it was before the shortages, surely businesses have no problems recouping their costs. And if production is the same now as before, why would there be shortages of staples. Obviously those shortages are artificially created.

America the Thug

From here.
I always knew that the OAS was a joke, a US-run organization, but I never knew quite how we went about it. Disgusting. This the way the US works all over the world, if you really want to know. I was brought up to think that we were always good guys. I guess that’s not so. Color me disappointed.

The New York Times has also championed attacks on Venezuela’s government by Luis Almagro, secretary general of the Organization of American States. Almagro was unable to win support for OAS action in support of his charges, and has been forced to retreat. For all its coverage of Venezuela, the Times did not find room to report the contents of a letter written to Almagro last November, recently released by its author and published in the centrist Caracas newspaper Ultimas Noticias (6/17/16). The letter, written by then-Uruguayan President Jose Mujica, whom Almagro served as foreign minister, expressed astonishment at his changes in position. “Luis,” he wrote:

You know that I have always supported and promoted you. You know that I quietly supported your candidacy for the OAS. I am sorry that the facts have repeatedly shown me that I was wrong. I don’t understand your silence on Haiti, Guatemala and Paraguay [the letter was written before the coup in Brazil] while you publish your letter in response to Venezuela.

How or why would a diplomat posted to the OAS change positions so dramatically? Perhaps an explanation comes from a Latin American diplomat who served as his country’s ambassador to that body.
“The US behaves at the Organization of American States exactly like the Corleone family,” said the diplomat, who asked not to be publicly identified. “The first time, they make you an offer: ‘After your tour of duty is up here, if you’d like to stay on in Washington, we can arrange a nice position for you at the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund.’
“If you don’t do what they want,” the diplomat said, “the second time, they threaten you. And if you still don’t do what they want, the third time they destroy you.”
When he was asked, “What do you mean by ‘destroy’?” he answered, “Believe me, you do not want to know what I mean by ‘destroy.’”

Up from the Bottom

Very cool comment from the Juggalo Funeral post. Moving and well-written. Enjoy.

Howard, I appreciate your thoughts on this pathetic situation. You wrote,

Try to imagine having nothing; no education, no skills, no talent, no drive. In short, no future!

Frankly, I don’t have to imagine it – I’ve been there. To compound the problem, I had been thrust into a society I was thoroughly unfamiliar with and did not understand at all (American culture) after having been reared in various foreign countries from the age of eight & coming back to USA at 16.

That same year, I simultaneously lost my virginity and became pregnant by a man seven years my senior. He was a cretin, obviously – and I was a lost, scared, emotionally wounded little girl who had just lost her Dad and seen her family disintegrate before her eyes…now I see all that, but back then I only felt shame and guilt.

I was ‘forced’ by my family to marry the man. It was what “good families” did back then, you see. Shame and coercion were the tools used to somehow, supposedly, magically, and remarkably preserve the family’s good name. Cool, huh?

So I did as I was told. I dropped out of high school the summer before my Senior year. I was 17 in July, and my baby was born in November. When she was six weeks old, I got pregnant…the first time I’d had intercourse since the birth. When my first child was 11 months old, I had twins. I had just turned 18.

At 19, I found myself with three babies in diapers, two black eyes, and one old car to use as a “getaway.” Having been effectively abandoned by my family partially due to circumstances beyond their control and partially because the whole family had exploded to bits, I ended up living in that old car for a couple of months.

Back then, disposable diapers were uncommon, inefficient, and very expensive. Basically, they were only used while traveling if you could afford them. I often had no way to do laundry after I escaped the abusive father of my babies, and many times I ended up using my T-shirts as diapers.

Fast forward…I’m a grandmother of seven, living in a little cabin my husband & I designed ourselves and put on our 100 acres of land – all paid for, free & clear – getting ready to retire early at age 54. I’ve had a successful career in medicine, although I did not attend college until my children had all left home.

Neither did I remarry until my kids had all grown and left the nest. It is possible, albeit often very difficult, to rise above the storms, slights, and indignities of life. For years I lived in shame, guilt, humiliation, disgrace, degradation, and ignominy. I felt I had no right to my very existence.

I worked at menial minimum wage jobs (often two or 2 1/2 jobs at a time) and steered clear of drugs, alcohol, etc…couldn’t have afforded them if I’d wanted them anyway. As the years went by, I did begin to use alcohol. Excessively. I was a functional drunk. Not an alcoholic, just a drunk…which is less respectable than being an alcoholic. I did it by choice, not because of addiction. It was my chicken-shit escape. I’m not proud of it, but that is the way it is. The way it was anyway.

Life can be hard at the best of times. Some of us choose to rise to the challenge and eventually overcome…some of us make excuses as to why we “can’t.” I have empathy for this couple…but they make their choices just as you and I make ours.

Being poor, disenfranchised, abandoned by every level of society, degraded, hurt, and relatively unintelligent didn’t define the rest of my life. Unintentionally or not, my life was effed up by my own actions and my own choices…I was an ignorant child, but I still did it to myself. By the same token, I eventually crawled out of it with no help from anyone.

The blame is all mine, but so is the eventual triumph.

I don’t really know why I felt moved to share this with you. Maybe just to say,

“I wish someone like you had cared enough to give me some encouragement, to just see me, when I was going through my own personal journey out of Hell.”

I feel for this family…as bad as it was for me when I was young, I never had to live in their world. I’m grateful for that. I wish them all the best in their own journey out of their own Hell…because it surely is Hell, whether of their own making or not.

Chavismo Must Stop the Economic Bleeding

This is one of the most sensible articles I have read on the Venezuela economic crisis yet. The first three proposals will be bitter pills to swallow, but they need to be done. Apparently those subsidies, put in as popular redistribution methods by the government in which the government enacted subsidies enabling many things to be sold below cost with the state making up the difference, can no longer be afforded. They were great at a fantastic growth in the standard of living (before the economic crisis) of the lower classes, but they have to go.
The problem will be getting it through the Opposition controlled Legislature. The Opposition’s screams about the terrible state of the economy ring hollow because every time Maduro goes to the Legislature to offer plans to deal with the economic crisis, the Opposition refuses to enact any of them. That is correct. The Opposition refuses to do even one tiny thing to try to deal with the economic crisis. This is highly suggestive that they are part of the crisis themselves and that in part it is manufactured.
Obviously the Opposition wants the economy to tank as much as possible and for the crisis to go on as long as possible because they see the crisis as good propaganda that “Chavismo doesn’t work.” Also the crisis offers them a perfect chance to throw out the government. In this way, they are similar to US Republicans who blocked everything Obama tried to do apparently in an effort to make his Presidency fail.
You guys wonder why I hate capitalists and rightwingers. Well, the Venezuelan Opposition are capitalists and rightwingers. The US Republican Party are capitalists and rightwingers. If you ask me, capitalists and rightwingers are literally the worst people on Earth. I do not care how well capitalism works. That is not my concern. My problem is not so much with capitalism as with capitalists, the people who engage in the activity. The system can work reasonably well with a lot of socialism to make it go down easier, but the people who run the system are simply pond scum. They’re horrific and despicable human beings. I’m starting to see why Stalin shot them.

Chavismo Must Stop the Economic Bleeding

By Joe Emersberger – Telesur English
July 20th 2016

A special economic team convened by UNASUR, part of its effort to promote dialog between the Venezuelan opposition and Maduro’s government, has put together a detailed plan to lead Venezuela out of its worsening economic crisis. The key features of the plan are listed below:

  • A unification and clean float of the currency that should be implemented immediately.
  • Gradual lifting of price controls over an 18 month period.
  • Gradual lifting of all energy subsidies (not just gasoline) over an 18 month period.
  • Implement direct government subsidies to consumers, preferably universal subsidies, through an electronic discount card.
  • The indexing of all salaries to the monthly inflation rate for 18 months or until single digit inflation is achieved if that happens first.
  • A thorough and transparent audit of government assets so that non-strategic assets can be sold to finance the plan but also so that options for external financing become available.
  • The introduction of financial transaction and wealth taxes.

Implementation of an employment program to help people whose informal work (for example standing in lines to buy then resell price-controlled products) is eliminated through this plan. It would cost about 1 percent of GDP and would be financed with the taxes proposed above.
The first three proposals eliminate indirect subsidies which make certain products (and U.S. dollars) cheap for those lucky enough to get them. UNASUR’s team advises that the government support people’s incomes directly instead.
The first three proposals would be the most controversial to the Chavista base and to the Venezuelan left. The plan would be denounced by many as an IMF-style “paquetazo” as the IMF’s destructive policy recommendations have come to be known in Latin America. The left gained power throughout the region in the twenty-first century primarily because of the devastation caused by governments that followed IMF orders during the 1980-2000 period. It is not hard to see the huge political risk of doing things that look like backsliding or betrayal, but this plan is not in any way a return to IMF imposed neoliberalism.
Over the past three years, the costs of Venezuela’s indirect subsidies have not only skyrocketed, they have also largely failed to protect the poor, especially after oil prices collapsed near the end of 2014 but even for about a year before oil prices plummeted. UNASUR’s economic team estimates that Venezuela’s indirect subsidies cost the government anywhere from 11 to 17 percent of GDP.
To get a sense of how huge that is, consider that the United States presently spends about 3 percent of GDP on the Pentagon budget. The Venezuelan economy is being bled dry by massive indirect subsidies that do not work. UNASUR’s plan would stop the bleeding. It would replace outrageously costly and inefficient indirect subsidies with vastly more effective direct subsidies.
The UNASUR team does not address long term problems with Venezuela’s economy that have tended to confuse people about the immediate crisis it faces. Venezuela, like all developing countries, needs to diversify away from oil, and increase productivity generally in order to achieve the living standards of developed countries – at least key features of those living standards that should be strived for, like very low infant mortality.
In the Chavista era, the government has only had control over its state oil company, its main source of export revenue and hard currency, since about 2003, four years after the late Hugo Chavez was first took office. It took South Korea, a country not regarded as an ideological threat to the imperial powers, about 40 years to achieve the living standards of a rich country. It took Cuba about forty years to achieve a lower child mortality rate than the United States – a rich country that is a notorious laggard by that measure.
No “solidarity economy” that seeks to develop local production is going to begin to offset the hemorrhaging of 11 to 17 percent of GDP. There are many factors that go into successful long term planning and development, but no country striving to develop in the long term can afford incredibly wasteful and destabilizing polices in the present – especially in the context of a balance of payments crisis and low oil prices. Admonishing the Venezuelan government about long term planning and diversification is like talking to person with a serious stab wound about diet and exercise. The priority must be to stop the bleeding.
Venezuela’s Vice President has recently made remarks indicating that he understands and supports the nature of the UNASUR plan. It has never been totally clear if the government has allowed things to get so far out of hand as a result of political fears or from lack of understanding. People who have years of experience among grassroots Chavistas do not report that pressure from the government’s base will make them implement UNASUR’s plan. The base, it appears, do not know about the plan and would be probably misled about it by many grassroots leaders who would see it as a betrayal of Chavismo.
The government relies heavily on grassroots leaders during elections but that is no excuse for inaction. Moreover, as the UNASUR team points out, Venezuela has already made painful adjustments over the past few years through a huge reductions in imports. It could therefore very quickly deliver the benefits of implementing this plan, which is the best way to convince people that is necessary.
All around the world, people must really struggle to get any semblance of economic literacy. This is not a problem unique to Venezuela or to the left in Venezuela. The global economy was tanked in 2009 by massive housing bubbles in rich countries that “experts” failed to warn people about. Governments and big financial interests then took advantage of public ignorance again to make working people pay for the disaster.
People who care about the success of progressive change in Venezuela – and in Latin America – must do all they can to ensure that huge self-inflicted problems are avoided. Progressive governments will face extreme hostility abroad and at home during the best of times. They can least afford to make such serious mistakes.

The Maduro Election and the Riotous Aftermath

The Opposition got so inflamed by the media whipping up a frenzy that they went berserk and rioted all over the country. About 20 Chavistas were murdered. They burned down a number of the Free Clinics that the Chavistas had built in the poor neighborhoods and staffed with Cuban doctors. The Opposition hates those clinics more than anything else. A number of medical workers including nurses and physicians were murdered by the Opposition.
There were shots fired at the homes of a number of prominent Chavistas. It turned out that all of those inflammatory photos were fake. The ballot boxes in the ravine photo was from an election five years ago when the ballot boxes were simply discarded after the ballots were all counted. There were other logical explanations for all of the other fake stories and photos. The US press ran articles about the fake stolen election and the Opposition rioting because Maduro “stole the election.”
The Chavistas decided to do a recount to appease the Opposition and the US. The recount was counted by unbiased judges, and it was completely fair. Fully 60% of the votes were recounted. The recount vote matched the official vote tally perfectly. There was not even one single excess or subtracted vote. The judges stopped at 60% because they figured that if 60% of the votes were immaculate, obviously the election was fair, and there was no point counting anymore. The Opposition and the US then went on a huge campaign screaming that the recount had been unfair because they only counted 60% of the ballots. Ridiculous, huh?
The media and the Opposition had gotten their supporters so riled up with the endless lies about the fake stolen election that the Opposition rank and file went crazy and stated staging riots all over the country. The US said nothing other than that people were protesting the fake stolen elections.
The riots were very violent from Day One. The rioters were armed with guns, bombs, grenades and other arms. They set a number of fires. They destroyed a great deal of property. They put wires up at a lot of the intersections in the middle and upper class areas, effectively freezing traffic and causing huge traffic jams. A number of motorcyclists were killed when driving through the barriers by running into the wires that they could not see.
The Chavista police got involved, and while there were some excesses as there always are, any other police force on Earth would have been much more brutal about putting down the riots. The Chavista cops’ approach was almost dainty, very cautious, restrained and by the book. This is because the Chavistas knew that if there was any police brutality, the US would scream that the “brutal thug police of Chavista dictatorship” is brutalizing “poor innocent protestors.”
The US press uniformly falsely characterized the riots as peaceful demonstrations that were only made violent when brutal Chavista police tried to break them up. But as I noted, the Chavista cops were more restrained than any other police force on Earth would have been and the riots started out violent and stayed violent the whole time.
When it was all over, 42 people were dead. The US screamed about that figure for a long time, saying that Chavista police had “murdered 42 peaceful protestors.” Actually the majority of people killed were Chavista counter-protestors. A few police were also killed. A fair number of innocent bystanders were killed by the wires or stray bullets. Some of the Opposition protestors were killed but not a lot. Fatalities were pretty equally distributed among all participants in the rioting, including demonstrators on both sides, police and innocent bystanders. The Opposition rioters got off easy because they suffered a relatively lesser number of fatalities.
Due to the “horrible police violence that murdered 42 peaceful protestors,” Obama gave a lying speech where he said comically that Venezuela was one of the major military threats to the United States, up there with North Korea, Russia and Iran. This is stupid because the Chavistas have no military desires towards the US. Obama also slapped a number of sanctions on Venezuela for the “horrible police brutality” and “murders of the innocent.” That was a bum move because those police were more restrained than anyone else on Earth would have been, but no matter, to the US, they were still jackbooted murdering thugs.

The Shameful Behavior of the Venezuelan Opposition During the Elections of the Past 25 Years

The Opposition has tried to unseat the Chavistas in every election for over 25 years now. Until the most recent election, the Opposition lost every single time except once when they defeated a rewrite of the Constitution by 51-49%. The Opposition simply does not have the support of the majority and never has. Since they do not have majority support for their agenda, they have been trying extra-democratic means to unseat the Chavistas. When it comes to getting rid of the Chavistas, anything goes.
The Opposition tried to unseat Chavez himself many times, and he won 18 consecutive elections. They also had a recall vote that failed. The opposition periodically boycotted the elections, in fact, they boycotted the majority of the elections.
If the Opposition thought they were going to lose, they would start up a lying narrative that the elections were going to unfair and riddled with fraud. Good trick! If you are going to lose, accuse the winning side of electoral fraud! There is no electoral fraud, and the elections have all been free and fair as certified by many international observers. However, the US has screamed fraud and unfair election every time Chavez won. The US trick is that if Chavez wins, it’s always automatically fraud. The only time the US would say there was no fraud is if the Opposition ever won.
The election systems got better and better due to pressure on the Chavistas from the US. The Chavista electoral system is now the fairest election system on the face of the Earth. In the recent election that was won by Maduro, once again the Opposition screamed unfair and fraud all the way leading up to the election. The US also yelled fraud and unfair elections in the whole run-up to the elections. There was nothing unfair. Venezuela’s elections are the fairest on Earth. The US and the Opposition are just lying like they always do.
Finally Maduro won by a close vote, and the Opposition immediately screamed fraud. They made up all sort of lies about being intimidated as polling places and other nonsense. Then the entire Opposition press the next day ran many big stories screaming that the election had been a fraud. They used many dramatic photos, including a number of photos of Venezuelan ballot boxes discarded in ravines. The US also screamed that the elections were unfair and that Maduro cheated. The US began demanding that since Maduro won by such a close margin, that there needed to be a bicameral government with the Chavistas giving half the government to the Opposition. Bullshit or what?
All of this profoundly immoral and dishonest reporting, which amounted to entire papers written from front page to back with nothing but lies, false charges and made up stuff created an explosive situation in the country.

Two New Attacks by Muslims in Germany Today!

The first one occurred when a suicide bomber blew himself up outside a restaurant at Ansbach Music Festival in Ansbach, a city in Bavaria. The bomber was killed and 12 others were wounded. This definitely looks like a global jihad attack. The attacker was a Syrian refugee whose request for asylum had been turned down last year, but he had a temporary permit to stay. He had been treated twice at a psychiatric hospital for two prior suicide attempts. Police are calling it a potential terror attack for now.
Earlier today, another Syrian refugee attacked people with a machete in Reutlingen. That attack was preceded by some sort of an argument and police ruled out Islamic terrorism. A pregnant woman was killed and two others were wounded in that attack.
Refugees welcome!

More on Venezuelan Economy

TJF writes:

If it’s not economic warfare, then what the Hell is causing the shortages?
When a country’s inflation rate exceeds certain levels, especially in Venezuela’s case where they have to import food and a substantial number of goods, economic systems start breaking down. The country went from 50% inflation in early 2014 to 180% last year with expectations of 500% this year, indicating that prices double every 2 months. With such high inflation no one wants to accept the currency for any sort of goods, services, or wages. Of course one could easily argue that economic warfare is the cause of the inflation, I know little of Venezuela beyond what I have read in the conventional press.

1.The mass shortages are causing a lot of the inflation obviously. Supply and demand.
2. But most of the inflation is being caused by the unequal exchange rate. 1 government dollar = 40 black market dollars.
3. Lots of people are making plenty of money in Venezuela. The business sector is not going out of business or anything like that. When they sell products on the black market and smuggle them to Colombia, they make huge profits. Also a lot of them are playing the currency markets where they get a government dollar for 1$ that is worth at least $40 on the black market. The wildly inflated dollars on the black market are causing a lot of the inflation right there. The inflation is coming right out of that black market in dollars.
The stores in the rich areas are stocked to the rafters. They have no shortages of anything. All of the shortages are in the poorer or working class areas. The rich are not suffering at all. They can buy anything they want.
There is still a huge amount of capital flight going on. ~$50 billion dollars goes out of the country every year due to capital flight.

Various Schemes That the Opposition Has Tried to Get Rid of the Chavistas

Bottom line is the Opposition has tried everything in the book to get rid of the Chavistas, so why wouldn’t they try economic war? They already tried economic war twice before, once with a lockout strike and another time with the oil company strike/sabotage, both of which brought the economy to its knees. The Opposition has shown no qualms about using ruining the economy if it means getting rid of the Chavistas.
Further, serious shortages have appeared before every election for over 20 years now. ~1-2 months before every election, serious shortages of all sorts of things occur and many products become unavailable. So the Opposition has already shown that the4y are willing to create artificial shortages to try to get rid of the Chavistas. If they’ve created artificial shortages 18 times before, why wouldn’t they be doing it now?
Capital flight: Capital flight has been a problem from Day One of the Chavistas, and the currency controls were originally put in to stop the capital flight. You have to get a handle on capital flight, or your economy will collapse. So currency controls were put in limiting how many dollars you could take out of the country. This was a good idea, and it had to be done anyway. The business sector never cooperated with the Chavistas.
Military coup and oil company strike: The capital flight started from Day One, then a military coup, then the oil company strike, then a business lockout of workers strike where most of the businesses in the country simply closed up shop and locked out the workers.
Lockout strike: It is called a lockout strike because the workers show up every day wanting to work but they are locked out of the building. And there is no reason to shutter the enterprise because it is going fine. The businesses are not going out of business. They are just going on strike. The lockout strike lasted a year and caused huge damage to the economy.
Constant rioting for over a decade: After that, they tried all sorts of things including continuous rioting in the upper class and middle class areas that has been going on for almost 10-15 years now. For a long time, the Chavista police just stood off the side and let them riot because they knew that if they tried to arrest the rioters, the US would start screaming human rights violations of the brutal police thugs, and they would put sanctions on the country.

Omar Mateen and Displacement

Erik Sieven writes:

When he hated gays, or maybe gays from Puerto Rico why didn´t he just attack one single gay person, e.g. the man from Puerto Rico he was angry about in the first place? Or why didn´t he just swallow his anger like 99% of humanity do it day after day? No, it had to be such a big thing, with hostages, shooting the police etc. etc.

Because he is a lunatic mass shooter, that’s why.
Mass shooters do this displacement stuff all the time. The one school shooter was mad at his Mom, so he shot up the school where she worked and murdered a bunch of children. James Holmes was mad at humanity, so he shot up a theater and murdered innocent moviegoers. Serial killers hate their mothers, but instead of killing their Moms, they run around murdering women who are standin’s for Mom. People do this all the time, and if this guy is just another mass shooter nutcase, which I now think, we can’t expect him to act rationally.

Why Straight Men Get Angry When Gay Men Hit on Them

The question was asked on Qujora: How do straight men feel when gay men hit on them? The answers that followed were typical Cultural Left Quora types. They were all along the lines of, “Oh no, I would be perfectly ok with it. It would be flattering. But I would tell him thanks but no thanks.” One thing I found shocking was how many straight men have been hit on by gay men.  A number of the straight men commenting said they had been hit on by gay men many times. I guess this goes to show a couple of things that I have always suspected:

  1. Gay men don’t have the faintest idea who is gay and who isn’t.
  2. Gaydar may work sometimes, but the false positive rate seems incredibly high.
  3. Gay men probably just go after any goodlooking man. I had some friends who were (straight) male models, and they told me that they had gay men after them constantly such that it was almost like swatting mosquitoes.

Here is my answer:
It makes me extremely uncomfortable.
Do I get angry at the gay man for hitting on me? No, I would not get angry at the man because that’s rude and mean, and I am not a mean person. Would I get angry afterwards? Quite possibly. Or disgusted. Or frightened and worried.
First of all, this has happened to me so many times I cannot even count them. For a long time, it just made me feel extremely uncomfortable.
Once as a teenage boy, I was hitchhiking, and a very nervous man gave me a ride and then asked if I would give him a blowjob. I got very offended and angry, said no, and demanded to be let out of the car right then. He got very upset and started crying and said he wanted to take me home. All the way home he was crying and saying, “I’m not a bad person.” This was 1973 before things got so liberal. I must say that this is a very sad story and I did feel rather sorry for this tragic man.
It is generally not true that gay men who get angry when gay men hit on them have “issues.” Issues implies that these straight men are secretly gay themselves or some other idiocy.
This goes back to the stupid but very popular notion that homophobes are all gay themselves. They’re not. Yes, there are some men who are engaging in some reaction formation. Instead of being gay, these men are basically straight with a small amount of homosexual interest. I suppose they can’t handle having that bit of interest, so they assault gay men or men perceived to be gay.
I have found instead that the more masculine and aggressively heterosexual a man is, the more he reacts negatively towards gay men. So most homophobes are not gay at all. Instead they are extremely macho and aggressively heterosexual men who simply hate and despise gay men.
Gay men need to get over this crap that all homophobes are gay. Maybe a few are a bit gay, but most of them just hate your guts. Yes, gay men, there are a lot of men who just out and out hate you for whatever reason. This is a bitter pill to swallow, so maybe that is where the homophobes are gay nonsense came from.
People want to know why straight men hit gay men who hit on them. Well, here is the reason, and I have quite a bit of experience with this.
As I said, I have gotten hit on by gay men more times than I can count, mostly when I was a young man in my 20’s. I was often told that I was very handsome back then, so maybe that was it. Also a fair number of people used to think I was gay myself, so maybe that was part of it too.
Now, when I told people that gay men hit on me, I got this aggressive, violent reaction that typically boiled down to the person calling me a faggot. The reasoning goes like this: to a lot of homophobic men, a man should be so aggressively macho or hypermasculine such that it would be dead obvious to anyone, including a gay man, that he was not gay. So a real man would never get hit on by a gay because all gay men would figure out he was straight and leave him alone.
You follow?
Ok, now following on from that, these same homophobes say that if a gay man hits on you, that means you’re gay. Yes they actually believe this and quite a few times, when I related how gay men wouldn’t leave me alone, that was the response I got: “That’s because you’re gay, Bob.”
Get it?
Along the same lines, a lot of homophobes think that if a gay man hits on you, then that is because you give off a gay vibe. In other words, if they hit on you, it’s because they think you’re gay. And why do they think you’re gay? Because you act gay obviously. So when you admit that a gay man hit on you, you are admitting that you act gay.
I admit that I often worried this. When a gay man hit on me, I used to get quite worried. “Why did he hit on me? Does he think I’m gay? Why does he think I’m gay? Do I act gay? Do I look gay? What am I doing wrong here?”
Now most straight men find it very insulting if you tell them that they act gay. It’s such an insult that if you say it, you might just get hit.
One more thing: masculinity. Masculinity is a huge deal to most men, though none of them will ever admit it. It’s also a vast deal to most women, and none of them will ever admit it either. Masculinity is sort of the elephant in the room that no one talks about.
Now when a gay man hits on a straight man, he has just given the straight man the message: I think you’re gay. Other possible messages are: You’re gay. You act gay. You seem like you are gay, etc. etc.
Now many men perceive messages like that to be attacks on their masculinity. And in a way it is. So a gay man who hits on a straight man is committing a serious assault on that man’s masculinity. You’re telling him he’s not a man. You’re calling him a faggot.
One thing I never do is attack a man’s masculinity. I also never call any man gay ever for any reason, even if he is flaming. I know my gender very well and I know that many straight men will defend their masculinity aggressively. If you seriously attack a man’s masculinity in any way, you are likely to get an angry response. You might even get hit. You might even get killed. So what it boils down to is that I consider all men to be potential killers (sadly that’s what they are), and I am so frightened of men that I would never insult a man’s masculinity for fear he might kill me.
So there you have some of the reasons why straight men react angrily or violently if a gay man hits on them. It’s not a bafflingly irrational act. There’s a logic behind it. You may not agree with the logic, but it’s there all right.

More on Omar Mateen

Erik Sieven writes:

It might be right to say that the Orlando attack was no Islamist attack. But I don´t buy into the argument, that it can´t be so because Maheen supported different groups like Hezbollah and IS which fight each other.
For example when a Russian with a swastika tattoo yells “Heil Hitler” and “Russia first” and attacks a foreigner in Russia, do you say “no he can´t be a Nazi because he both supports Russian nationalism and Nazis, and those were enemies”. No, of course you say he is Nazi, a dumb one on top, because Nazis hated Russia (well there aren’t really non-dumb Nazis).
Maheen might have been a Islamist, and only because he is too dumb to at least tell apart different Islamist groups he says he supports does´t change anything.

He wasn’t an Islamist. He was barely even a Muslim, and everyone says he was not a practicing Muslim anyway.
Look, global jihadists hate homosexuals and feel that they need to be killed. When you say that Mateen was a global jihadist, then you say that he believed that homosexuals were so evil that they needed to be killed. But this is not what he believed. Why? Because Mr. Mateen was quite gay himself!
Mateen also liked to drink. He spent most of his time in nightclubs and gay bars. That’s not what a global jihadist does. Global jihadists think drinking is a serious crime and think that nightclubs and bars, especially gay bars, ought to be attacked. Or at least those in Muslim countries should be attacked. Now if you say Mateen was a global jihadist, then you say that he attacked this place because it was a nightclub that served alcohol and he believed that those things are evil. But that’s not what he believed at all. Mateen loved to drink and he spent most of his time in nightclubs and bars.
The idea that this boozing, barhopping gay man was some sort of an Islamist is madness. He was not an Islamist. He was barely even a Muslim. That is, he was a Muslim in name only, as secular as they come.
I would say that this was gay on gay crime. Or maybe an extreme case of gay panic on Mateen’s part. I think he was just another mass shooter like James Holmes or Cho.


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)