IQ and Crime in the US Redux

Repost from the old site. This is follow-up to an earlier post – Black Crime and Intelligence – An Intrepid Investigation. No matter how much Leftists and liberals deny it, there are clear differences in racial crime rates in the US. US Hispanics and Blacks have higher crime rates than Whites in the US in the same way that Asians have lower rates. It is neither controversial nor racist to report on this observable fact. The usual Left explanation for elevated Hispanic and Black crime rates is poverty, lack of opportunity, unemployment, low rates of educational attainment, lack of government investment and poor schools in poor Black and Hispanic neighborhoods. The general rationale behind all of these is said to endemic White structural racism and discrimination against Blacks and Hispanics. Another argument is that Blacks and Hispanics do not have elevated crime rates – it is only that racist police racially profile Blacks and Hispanics to stop and search them more often, resulting in higher arrest rates, while Whites who are just as criminal are let off the hook. These appealing arguments are becoming harder and harder to sustain in the face of new evidence and rapidly decreasing White racism in US society. This decline has occurred in tandem with harsh penalties – social, occupational and monetary – against Whites who discriminate against non-Whites, continuing affirmative action programs, quotas and goals, judicial mandates for ethnically diverse schools and workforces, etc. All of this has resulted in a White population whose recent thinking has been molded by anti-racist discourse and who consciously try to avoid overt anti-White discrimination and even bigotry most of the time. This is actually a good thing. Each and every human being should be evaluated and treated on their individual merits or demerits, race be damned. And, regarding crime, the judicial system should be fair with regard to suspects and arrestees. One problem in getting a handle on racial differences in crime rates is that it has been very difficult to find good ethnic breakdowns of US crime rates, mostly because law enforcement agencies usually refuse to count Hispanic offenders at all or in any rational way. The Color of Crime, a report by the frankly racist New Century Foundation, is nevertheless an excellent document that has managed to dredge up some good figures for Hispanic, American Indian and Pacific Islander (in the US, they are about 5 Samoans and Hawaiians are Polynesians, but Chamorros are Micronesians. Hawaiians are well-known to have an elevated crime rate in Hawaii. For instance, Hawaii has the highest rate of theft, larceny and property crime of any state. It is a good guess that much of this stealing is being done by native Hawaiians. In (independent) Western Samoa itself, recent reports describe a over-represented in juvenile hall in San Francisco, and across the bay in Alameda County, Samoans have a higher crime rate than Hispanics. And in Micronesia, on Guam at least, the crime rate has gone through the roof since the 1960’s, whereas previously it was quite low. The breakdown of the nuclear family and the introduction of a money-based economy has been blamed for the crime explosion on Guam. Saipan is also now reported to have a high crime, and even murder, rate. The reasons are not known. It has been idiotically bashed all over the Left as “racist”. Here is a typical argument, this one from Wikipedia:

One New Century Foundation’s publication, The Color of Crime, makes various claims about the relationship between crime and race. The publication concludes that black people are more dangerous than white people, just as “young people are more dangerous than old people” and “men are more dangerous than women.” It claims that is logical to take precautions around black people.

The SPLC has led attacks against the report authored by the execrable Heidi Weiss, leader of an attack force against the fine scholar Kevin MacDonald. The attacks by Tim Wise on ZNet are quite sophisticated. An excellent rebuttal of many of Wise’s main points can be found on Global Politician here. Bottom line is that Wise appears to be disputing what seems obvious to most any non-Leftist with a brain: Black people have a dramatically elevated crime rate, and one is more likely to be victimized by Blacks than by Whites, no matter what one’s race is. Furthermore, Wise’s characterizing of Jared Taylor as a “White Supremacist” is as problematic as calling 9 Wise is an anti-racist activist. I am an anti-racist too, but facts are facts. Despite the fact that The Century Foundation authored the report, The Color of Crime is excellent, and attacks on the report do not do it service. Those opposed to the report are asked to logically rebut its arguments or hold their tongues. The best figures are towards the middle of the report. Of most interest are the overall Hispanic and Black crime rates. The report states that the Black crime rate is 7.4 times the White rate, the Hispanic rate is 2.9 times the White rate and the Indian and Hawaiian rates are about 2 times the White rate. From another study, Masking the Divide, by the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives (actually a liberal think tank), the figures are a bit different: the Black crime rate is 9.1 times the White crime rate and the Hispanic crime rate is 3.7 times the White crime rate. Combining the two reports, we get a Black crime rate 8.2 times the White rate and an Hispanic crime rate 3.3 times the White rate. The Color of Crime found that poverty, unemployment and lack of education add little to the Black and Hispanic crime rate differentials compared to the White rate – that is, when Whites, Blacks and Hispanics all live in poverty, have the same low educational variables and the same unemployment rates, the differential between Blacks and Hispanics as opposed to Whites remains pretty much the same. The report also effectively deals with familiar complaints from the Left that the Black crime rate is so high because police selectively target Blacks for arrest while ignoring White criminals. A careful examination of the data in the report, shows that, actually, looking at the whole picture, if anything, the system is somewhat prejudiced in favor of Blacks and against Whites. There is a suggestion that Blacks are actually underrepresented, and Whites, overrepresented, in the nation’s prison population as compared to their actual crime rates. Hence, prejudice and discrimination does not appear to be a significant factor in Black crime rates. Further, Blacks are much more likely to target Whites as crime victims than vice versa. An incredible anecdote: In a 3-year period in the US, there were 9,000 cases of group Black on White sexual assaults – about 10 per day. In that same 3-year period, Whites, with a 4.5 times greater population, committed exactly zero group sexual assaults on Blacks. That figure alone is simply stunning. The Left loves to talk about hate crimes, but the only hate crimes they are interested in are White hate crimes against non-Whites. The report makes it quite clear that Blacks are much more likely to commit hate crimes against Whites than vice versa. What is fascinating is that the media plays up White on Black hate crimes for weeks on end as the crimes of the century, while Black on White hate crimes are met with deafening silence. That right there would seem to give the lie to the notion that the US media is hopelessly prejudiced against Blacks and in favor of Whites. If anything, the opposite seems to be the case. I have no idea why Whites are so much less likely to commit crimes than Blacks or Hispanics, or even why the lesser differential between Whites and Amerindians and Hawaiians exists, nor why Asians commit crimes at dramatically lower rates than Whites. Some will talk about genes and others about culture. Lining up IQ with crime rates seems entirely logical to me. Groups with lower average IQ’s should commit more crimes than those with higher IQ’s on an ascending linear scale. Unfortunately, the results do not pan out very well. Let us look at some racial IQ scores followed by racial crime rates in the US:

IQ scores:
East Asians:1    106 (link)
Whites:          103 (link)
Hispanics:       89 (link)
American Indians 87 (link)
Blacks           85 (link)
Polynesians      85 (link, link and link).
Crime rates:
Asians:      7
Whites:      Baseline
Amerindians: 10
Polynesians: 10
Hispanics:   23
Blacks:      72

The racial IQ scores and racial crime rates do not line up very well; there are some correlations, but there are also some problems. The small difference between East Asian and White IQ’s in the US would not seem adequate to explain an Asian crime rate that is a mere 2 The Hispanic crime rate is 6 In these cases, there is absolutely no correlation whatsoever between IQ and crime. There is a modest correlation between crime and IQ between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics, but the differences are completely out of sync with what we would expect merely based on IQ. In particular, the Black and Hispanic crime rates are far higher than expected by IQ compared to Whites2 (especially looking at the Polynesian and Amerindian figures), and the Black crime rate that is 2.5 times higher than the Hispanic rate is dramatically higher than expected by IQ compared with Hispanics. Furthermore, we can completely rule out IQ-crime links in Hispanic mestizos . How is it that Amerindians have a crime rate 2 times that of Whites, yet White-Amerindian mixed race people (Mestizos with an average of only 1/3 Indian blood and probably a good amount of heterosis) have a crime rate of 3.3 times that of Whites? That makes no sense whatsoever. One would expect White-Amerindian mixed-race US Mestizos to have a crime rate median between Whites and Amerindians and probably closer to Whites, say 1.35 times the White rate, considering that Mexicans and Chicanos in the US are about 6 Also, from 1960-1995, the Flynn Effect3 has been causing steadily increasing IQ’s in Americans of all ages and ethnic groups. During this period, the US population increased its IQ by 9 points. At the same time, crime exploded from 1960-1980 and has continued at a very high level ever since. How is it that a steadily rising US IQ has coincided with a skyrocketing crime rate? The Flynn Effect has had its most noticeable effects at the lowest end of the IQ range – precisely the people that are most likely to commit crimes. Nevertheless, wild crime increases occurred in tandem with a progressive loss of those very people most likely to commit crimes – those with the very lowest IQ’s. All of this seems to indicate that whatever in God’s name is causing racial differentials in US crime rates, IQ does not seem to play a huge role. Perhaps other biological factors could be involved, but that seems dubious. For instance, there are recent suggestions that Polynesians (the study looked at Maoris) may be predisposed to violence due high rates of an a gene that codes for low levels of a component – MAO inhibitor – that breaks down neurotransmitters in the brain associated with violent and impulsive behavior. With lower levels of the MAO inhibitor, Polynesians have higher levels of catecholamines that tend to cause violent and aggressive behaviors. It is likely that Polynesians selected for aggression during their colonization of the Pacific Islands. Without an aggressive temperament, they may not have been able to undertake mad, near-suicidal journeys on boats to colonize those islands in the first place. Once on the islands, individual tribes of South Sea Islanders, especially on Fiji and New Zealand, were continuously locked in the most horrible tribal warfare with most of their neighbors, in addition to having downright brutal and vicious societies of their own. No evidence has yet been presented of a Black or Mestizo genetic propensity to violence. How is it then that the Polynesian Polynesians, with their low rates of MAO-inhibition, have a dramatically lower crime rate than Blacks and Hispanics, who have no provable genetic links to crime? Very well then. Having disposed of biological arguments, let us move along. I am inclined to fall back on the old environmental standby – culture. Even if poverty, lack of education and unemployment have little to do with high Black and Hispanic crime rates and the role IQ is not dramatic either, there is yet another explanation: There is a possibility that in recent years, both Blacks and Hispanics have developed an underclass culture that is simply criminogenic in and of itself. The hows and whys of the development of this underclass can be debated at length, but it’s existence seems uncontroversial, and whatever caused this sick culture, IQ or race itself do not seem to be at work. See this website, Brown Pride , for an example of a depraved, wicked and amoral subculture operating in the Hispanic underclass. This Black and Hispanic underclass contrasts with large numbers of Blacks and Hispanics who have “made it”, assimilated to proper US society, are employed and out of poverty, and have relatively low crime rates. 1. The only data available for Asian IQ’s in the US are for East Asians. This group logically includes Koreans, Chinese, Japanese, Ainu, Taiwanese, Mongolians, Tibetans, Hmong, Mien and some smaller groups, but we do not know if all these groups were included. Studies in the US usually focus on the first three groups. It is quite difficult to draw a line showing where “East Asians” end and “Southeast Asians” begin. 2. Let us suppose a linear relationship between Hispanic and White IQ’s and crime rates. Extrapolating that to Black IQ, we should get a Black crime rate 4.9 times higher than the White rate; instead the rate is 8.2 times higher. Assuming a linear relationship between Black and White IQ’s and crime rates, we should get an Hispanic rate that is 5.4 times the White rate; instead it is 3.3 times the White rate. Differentials between White, Hispanic and Black rates alone cannot be fully explained by IQ. Either the Black rate is higher than expected, or the Hispanic rate is lower, or both. 3. The Flynn Effect has been subjected to a lot of criticism, typically emanating from those White Nationalists who refuse to believe that anyone, especially the Blacks and Browns they dislike, is getting smarter. A number of arguments have been put forth, one of the most powerful of which is that the Flynn Effect does not show an increase in intelligence; it just shows that people are getting better at taking tests. Yet the Flynn Effect shows up as early as 4 years old. One wonders just how many rigorous tests the average 4 yr old has been subjected to? Furthermore, Flynn himself presents some interesting arguments that cast doubt on the test sophistication argument. Furthermore, in dismissing the Flynn Effect as simply measuring “some abstract test-taking ability”, these same detractors pour cold water on IQ tests themselves, the results of which they so cherish, as they show the delightful 10 and 15 point gaps between Whites and Browns and Blacks respectively. The consensus now is that test-taking skills cannot explain the Flynn Effect. Another argument is that the Flynn Effect is having little effect on “g”, a hypothesized, supposedly heavily genetic or biological factor of purported pure, raw intelligence. However, the Flynn Effect is greatest on the most heavily loaded g tests, and much less on the least g-loaded tests. Either “g” means nothing, or “g” is also increasing. Note that there is good evidence that “g” is in fact increasing, and a good theory is that it is related to improved nutrition. More evidence linking nutrition to IQ is found in studies linking IQ with micronutrient levels, namely iron , in the blood. This is because height has been increasing prime driver of the Flynn Effect. Heterosis has supposedly been increasing in modern society as more isolated, rural and ethnocentric populations move to urban areas and have children with those outside their ethnic group. But Flynn himself completely pours cold water on the heterosis theory. A very long (24 pp.) discussion about whether or not the Flynn Effect is valid and what it is measuring is here. The American Scientist also took a look at the subject in a much-quoted article. Steve Sailer wraps it up in a recent post, suggesting that the Flynn Effect shows people are definitely getting smarter, but only in certain ways. Sailer is not even really a White Nationalist, as he advocates “citizenism” as opposed to ethnic ethnocentrism. This is close to the universalism advocated by this blog. His site is always interesting, and it worth a read.

Time to Take Back “Nigger”

Repost from the old site.

Some Black folks been busy lately trying to bury the word nigger once and for all – recent months have seen symbolic funerals and burials of the n-word by mainstream Black organizations. This movement probably stems from the OJ Simpson trial in the mid-1990’s, when n-word was substituted for nigger.

Nowadays, nigger is as taboo as can be.

Can you say, “That racist jerk called a Black man, ‘Nigger!’?”

Nope.

Can we use the word nigger to describe the word widely used amongst Blacks themselves?

Nope.

One may not use the word nigger under any circumstances.

This is strange.

First, it implies that nigger is either an obscenity or like one’s private parts, ok to be spoken or revealed in privacy but certainly not in public. But nigger is neither obscenity in word nor flesh.

Second, banning the word nigger implies that it is so horrible, and that Blacks are so sensitive, that even the sight or sound of the word will drive these oversensitive Black souls either to tears or to rage. Now, Blacks have never struck me as a cringing, hypersensitive race of inhibited crybabies.

The Black man can take an insult. Why not – we kept him in a cage for centuries, only let him out to be policed like an animal in an open air zoo for another 100 years, finally liberated him via bullets and water hoses 40 years ago, and oppression and discrimination yet linger.

Through it all, the Black man has stood up and taken it like a man. By implying that Black men can’t bear to see the word nigger without dissolving into wimpy tearfulness, we insult their masculinity and fortitudinous nature.

Now that we have settled the absurdity of killing, let alone burying, a word, let us see how we may resurrect the comatose patient.

Who should be allowed to use the word?

Obviously, Blacks will keep on using the word themselves, as is their right. Further, Blacks can decide how, where and why they use the word, if at all. It’s only fair to give Blacks ownership over this word, which is really their word.

Blacks are perfectly correct that Whites should not use this word, and don’t give us that phony, “Well, Blacks use it, so why can’t we?” nonsense.

Semantics is a subfield of Linguistics. In Semantics, we say that words mean whatever people who use them say they mean. End of story. Nigger has one set of meanings when Blacks use it and another set when Whites use it. That’s not Black hypocrisy; it’s the way humans use language. Should racists be granted the right to use the word? No, they use it as a weapon to attack others.

I would like to request that we resurrect the word for journalistic and historical writing integrity. If a non-Black calls Blacks niggers, let’s write out the word. Forget this weasel-word n-word. We should have the right to say, “In the South 50 years ago, most Whites referred to Blacks as niggers.”

What are we accomplishing by refusing the write the evil word? Are we preventing its spread in society, sort of like a disease control agency? Let’s let non-racist creative writers, journalists, social scientists, historians feel free to use the word, sparingly, like seasoning on food, as needed. How about one more case? Why can’t we put the word nigger in the mouths of racists? Why can’t we refer to David “Send the niggers back to Africa” Duke? Or Newt “Cut the niggers off welfare” Gingrich? Or Philippe “I like to measure nigger penises” Rushton?

Let’s boil down some of these racist arguments just a bit and give them some nigger-seasoning.

Why do the same racists who love to rant about supposed Black genetic stupidity love to rave on about Black basketball skills? What’s the real message here? How about, “Niggers sure are good at basketball! They better be, cuz they sure ain’t got no brains!”

What’s the real message of the scientific racism that says that Blacks are genetically stupid, that this stupidity is irremediable by any environmental means, and that attacks any signs of Black intellectual progress (Like, for instance, this vile and wicked blog, recently referred in an New York Times piece by Amy Harmon as a “popular science blog”)? Isn’t it really, “God-damn, niggers are dumb!”

Why don’t we call the Murrays, Rushtons and Lynns the “Niggers sure are stupid!” academics? After all, that’s what they are selling, right?

Have you noticed that endless obsession that the media has with Zimbabwe? Zimbabwe – formerly Rhodesia – used to be run by virulently racist White criminals who were then evicted by a Black liberation movement.

Zimbabwe did all right for quite some time – in fact, throughout the 1980’s, it was regarded as a model of democracy, good governance, and multiracial harmony, and it weathered the African famines of the 1980’s quite well – until it started seizing the land of White farmers in the 1990’s. And why did it seize the land of the White farmers?

Because land reform was a necessity, but Britain had quit funding the “willing buyer, willing seller” fake land reform that never really worked well anyway since so few White farmers were willing to sell land. 5,000 White farmers, a tiny percentage of the population, had almost all the good land, all stolen at gunpoint from Blacks decades earlier.

Meanwhile, Blacks had the worst land and only tiny plots of it anyway, such that they barely had rocks to eat.

They were overcrowded onto this crappy land, so it naturally started to erode. The racist Whites then derided the Blacks for “poor nigger farming methods.” The racists then blamed the livestock of the Blacks for the erosion, and stole 1 million head of “the niggers‘ (ill-disciplined) cattle”. The real cause of the land erosion was the racist feudal farming system.

After the willing seller, willing buyer game ended, it was replaced by a project whereby Zimbabwe tried to come up with money to buy out willing Whites. But an economic crisis occurred (caused by an IMF structural adjustment and the free marketization of the economy) during the 1990’s, and Zimbabwe lacked the cash to purchase White farms.

Whites weren’t selling anyway, and the Brits were backing them to the hilt. Angry Blacks who had fought in the liberation war began clamoring for the land to which they were entitled.

Mugabe, suffering a crisis of legitimacy at the time, gave into them. Hence, the “land invasions” began. The media rails about how “all of the land went to Mugabe’s cronies” – the message here: “Niggers are lying, cheating thieves”.

To some extent, this is true (that land went to cronies). Initially, the land reform was decentralized and handed over to local party officials, which was actually a good idea. Unfortunately, the local officials promptly turned it into a spoils system, just like the corrupt cronyism we see in every African country!

For some reason, the cronyism of Mugabe’s party was worse than that of the rest of Africa, which is ignored by the imperialist media. The important point here is that Mugabe was not really involved in this corruption. After a while of this, Mugabe got a hold of the process, and now most of the land is just going to poor Black farmers.

The next part of the media lie is that since all the land went to Mugabe’s buddies, the poor Black farmers crowded into the cities, where Mugabe promptly took them on in a fake urban renewal campaign called “Drive Out Trash,” which was really just a campaign to destroy the homes of his political opponents and render them homeless.

First of all, most of the land is now going to small Black farmers, so there is no need for landless Black farmers to crowd into the cities. This is why small rural farmers are one of Mugabe’s main support bases, the other being the Shona tribe, the largest tribe in the country.

Second of all, the unfortunately named “Drive Out Trash” campaign was really just an urban renewal campaign where horrible Black slums were destroyed to make way for 120,000 much better government housing units. The urban renewal campaign is going on right now and much nicer government homes are replacing squalid hovels. The urban renewal has been hampered by sanctions, though.

True, the land reform has been chaotic, as land reforms often are in the beginning, especially when too much land reform is done too quickly. The old system has been crushed, and the new one often has not yet gotten going yet. The result is sometimes one or more years of famine harvests. But all this BS could have been prevented if Britain and the White farmers had gone along with a sane land reform program in the beginning.

At the same time, after Zimbabwe had been devastated by a decade of IMF-led imperialist looting combined with terrible droughts of the 1990’s, Mugabe logically told the IMF to go to Hell and refused to pay off his debts.

With the land invasions and the IMF nose-thumbing, all Hell broke loose in US and UK imperialist circles, especially in the former colonist, Britain, where the press went nuts and has never recovered. Devastating sanctions were quickly slammed on Zimbabwe. Foreign investment plummeted by 9

Even UNICEF is in on the brutal punishment – whereas in other African lands, AIDS sufferers get $74 per sufferer per year, Zimbabwe only gets $4 per sufferer per year from UNICEF. Then Mugabe, as AIDS devastated the land – the “dumb, murderous nigger Mugabe” – morphs into “genocidal nigger Communist Mugabe”. Really it’s just an AIDS epidemic devastating the country, as it is wrecking surrounding nations.

The land invasions were a predictable mess, and a few Whites were killed. These deaths have been insanely blown out of proportion by a leering media. In Britain, the media fairly screams “White genocide!” You can imagine the clamor on White Nationalist sites. In truth, a whole nine White farmers have been killed over an eight-year period. The death of one White farmer yields vastly more breathless Western prose than the deaths of 30 Zimbabwean Blacks might.

Another media obsession is “Mugabe the dictator.” Mugabe is authoritarian, but as such folks go, he is pretty lightweight. The opposition leaders regularly give interviews in which they call for armed struggle against Mugabe’s regime or invasion by imperialist countries. It is amazing how this “evil dictator” allows those who call for his very head to speak out and run free.

The West has funded the opposition, which has little support, for years now. The opposition is totally tied to imperialism and pushes an extreme free market program that is not only the last thing that Zimbabwe needs right now but is the very thing that caused so many problems for the nation in the 1990’s.

The opposition has led a number of violent campaigns, and some of their leadership has been arrested and beaten. The Western media has gone nuts over these minor transgressions.

The opposition has also historically allied at various with the White farmers in Zimbabwe, White apartheid supporters in South Africa, and the vicious, apartheid-supported RENAMO guerrillas in Mozambique. Obviously, they are rejected by the vast majority of Zimbabweans.

The main opposition party was clearly involved in a coup attempt that tried to kill Mugabe in alliance with UK imperialism, but a court of the Mugabe “dictatorship” somehow refused to convict the plotters.

Truth is that the opposition is essentially run and funded by UK and US imperialism. Zimbabwe sees the UK and US as enemy nations, and in fact they are. As such, I would argue that the opposition are in effect traitors and spies for openly working the enemies of the nation. Mugabe is too kind. I am amazed he even lets the opposition walk around free at all. Mugabe the “dictator” has held several elections, which are now monitored by international monitors, and monitors have upheld all of the results. At the same time, opposition protests caused the “dictator” Mugabe to cancel several proposed Constitutional amendments.

The sanctions are the cause of almost all of the economic decline and ruin that the country has suffered since 1999. There is no a priori reason to suggest that Zimbabwe should be the most devastated country in Africa. The nasty racist suggestion is: “Niggers can’t run a country.”

In particular, the suggestion is worse: “Niggers are so stupid and childlike that they are incapable of running a country and quickly destroy any country given to them. Look at Zimbabwe. It was doing great when the nigger children had White grown-ups to take care of them. Then they threw Whitey out and tried to run it by themselves, and look what happened.”

The sneaky riff: “Niggers destroy any country they run. The only way that nigger countries can succeed is if the niggers are colonized by superior Whites.” The particularly nasty aspect of this vicious line is that it both supports White colonialism and White apartheid at the same time.

Another line is taken by many “race realists” such as the noxious crowd over at GNXP.

It is interesting that these “race realists” are almost always from the more “superior” races and rarely from the more “inferior” races.

Anyway, these folks take the objectively racist line that the chaos in Zimbabwe is because…”niggers are too stupid to run a country!” IQ scores in Africa are then used to prove that idiocy is what is killing Zimbabwean Blacks.

It is true that, as James Watson noted, IQ scores in Africa are markedly low. These IQ scores are valid. However, IQ scores in Zimbabwe are about 67, which is precisely the African average.

The other African nations, despite their low IQ’s, seem to muddle along, and at least are not experiencing Zimbabwean disaster. Minus crippling sanctions, Zimbabwe would be expected to muddle along about as well as any African nation.

Another problem is that much of the chaos in Zimbabwe is being caused by one of the worst AIDS problems on Earth. This is conflated by imperialism’s media to mean “socialist Mugabe is slaughtering his people.” Truth is it’s mostly AIDS that is killing them, not Mugabe, and there is not much Mugabe can do about AIDS anyway.

Blacks did not destroy Zimbabwe – sanctions did. Zimbabwe was doing fine on its own for 19 years until it started grabbing the White farms. De facto White Supremacist countries like the US and UK then went nuts, slammed devastating sanctions on Zimbabwe, and it’s been screaming in the ruins ever since.

Viewed in this light, cheat sheet version of the destruction of Zimbabwe ends up as a (deliberate or not) White racist plot-scam to make Blacks look like genocidal incompetent children that need White adults to take care of them. I do not think imperialism intended the message to come out that way, but that’s how it came across.

Even worse, the line is: “Look! Niggers are so stupid and incompetent they can’t even grow food!” Black people grow food all over Africa and have been growing food for centuries. They don’t necessarily grown enough of it to feed their countries, but they do ok.

Africans are resourceful and hardy folks; humans have been there for 120,000 years, and they haven’t gone extinct yet. Fire and tools came out of Africa, and 73,000 years ago, when a volcano killed almost all humans on Earth, only a small band of 600 or so survived and kept the human race going.

Guess where the holdouts were? Africa, near Mount Kilimanjaro. Afterward, these Africans underwent extreme evolutionary changes called the Great Leap Forward, probably invented art and language, and exploded out of Africa to colonize the entire planet.

Yet these same folks are so stupid they can’t even grow food! Come on. There is yet one more snarky and wicked riff running through this whole imperialist aggression. It’s a lesson to the niggers in South Africa. It says, “Listen up, South African niggers! Look at Zimbabwe! This is what will happen to you if you try to do a land reform with those White farmers in your country! We will destroy you just like we did Zimbabwe! Don’t even think about it, niggers!”

Now, South Africa, which we will deal with below, desperately needs a land reform. 50,000 White farmers occupy 8

In the end, there is no reason why Zimbabwe should not at least be able to do just as well as the rest of the Africa. Zimbabwe is a disaster not because it is run by Blacks but because economic warfare has been declared on it.

Now let’s look at South Africa. Yes, the crime rate is very high. But it is in general much higher than the rest of Black Africa. Now why is that?

The racist line is: “Niggers are animals and criminals. They murder, rape and steal anything in their path, and their innate criminality destroys any country. They especially like to prey on White people because they are so hateful and racist towards Whites. And they love to rape White women because their own nigger women are so damn ugly. Look at South Africa, and peer into the heart of the nigger criminal beast.”

But South Africa is anomalous. Decades of criminal White apartheid against Blacks built up mountains of hate and resentment amongst impoverished Blacks who seethed with rage as the Whites lived in luxury while Blacks wallowed in miserable slums.

The insane gap between the rich and the poor in South Africa and the Black face of the poor combined with the White face of the rich insures racial-based redistributionist crime, often violent crime, for the foreseeable future. Barring South Africa’s unusual circumstances, we should not expect its crime rate to be much worse than the rest of Black Africa’s.

Once again, the nasty subtext: “Niggers need apartheid. The nigger can’t make it on his own. He’s an animal and he needs the White man’s paternalistic boot on his neck in order to survive and not destroy himself and his land.” As in Zimbabwe, it’s yet another argument to bring back settler-colonial apartheid and White rule.

Let’s take a look at another “race realist” obsession: Haiti. Haiti is said to be “the only Black country in the Americas,” and it is rightly described as a devastated place. The subtext: “There is only one nigger country in the Americas, and they have of course destroyed it.” But this is not the case. First of all, most of the Caribbean islands are primarily Black or mulatto, including Cuba. A number of these islands are still colonies, but others are not. And while Dominica, Jamaica, and Grenada have plenty of problems, they are not Haiti by a long shot.

The reasons Haiti is a wreck is due to its ultra-reactionary mulatto ruling class that has confiscated almost all of the wealth of the land since independence, in cooperation with frankly White racist White countries like France, the US, and Canada.

The elite have the army and cops, and they have been slaughtering the people to keep their feudal stranglehold over the place for 100 years now. France is still furious about independence in 1804, when Black slaves, under Desallines, rose up and killed all 25,000 White French slavers and their families on the islands. To this day, 200 years later, White racist France demands reparations for this admittedly bloody episode.

Unfortunately, as so often happens, the revolution was quickly usurped by a bunch of fake revolutionaries, who ended up turning it on its head and putting a version of the old system back in.

There were a group of light-skinned Blacks who were often freed slaves and had allied with the White slaveowners. These Blacks quickly wormed their way into power, installed feudal brutality over the wretched masses, and it’s been that way ever since. One more stolen revolution. Now this Haitian ruling class, in collaboration with imperialism, continues to keep Haiti under the boot.

Aristide was elected with 9

He tried to raise the abysmal minimum wage, gave a million kids a lunch a day (probably their only meal) and built more schools in eight years than had been built in the previous 200. The people experienced real, tangible gains under Aristide, the best they had seen in two centuries.

For these crimes, imperialism (the US, France, and Canada) destroyed Aristide and forced him to leave with a gun at his head. The imperialist operation may as well have been called Operation Enduring Sweatshop.

The only solution for Haiti is armed revolution. The army of the ruling class needs to be overthrown. Then the ruling class themselves need to be informed of the new program and encouraged to go along.

Those that do not need to be arrested, and then either thrown in prison or re-education camps, kicked out of the country, or as a last resort for some of the most bloodthirsty and criminal Duvalierists and Tonton Macoutes, shot. Their hands are dripping with blood anyway, so it’s not like innocent people would be persecuted or killed.

A dictatorship of the proletariat may be necessary for a while, or at least a democracy with a well-armed revolutionary army, police and citizenry. This is one thing Hugo Chavez has right – arm the people and revolutionize the military.

Until that happens, Haiti will continue to be Hell on Earth.

When racists use arguments like these against Blacks and Black nations, they are not really talking of Blacks or Black countries. We give them too much credit when we say they are talking about Black people or nations – they are not – they are talking about niggers and nigger countries. Let’s shove the n-word in their mouth, leave it there for all to see, force them to eat it, and make them tell us what it tastes like.

Admittedly, we are taking some risks with this approach, namely the risk of legitimizing the term nigger. But most sane people already understand the difference between Blacks’ use of the word and Whites’ use of it. I don’t see why we can’t extend things a bit.

Note: Inspiration for this post came in part from a Michael Eric Dyson show on the radio. Dyson is a brilliant and gifted Black academic (though a bit too lenient on rap culture). Check out this great book, will get your brain moving! A bit hard to read, but a lot of my readers can handle him, I think. Awesome stuff. I wish all these racist and White nationalist idiots who rant on about how stupid Black people are could read this most challenging Black scholar.

Thanks also to the outrageous Black blog Look at This Nigger for additional humor and inspiration along the same theme.

References

Elich, Gregory. Zimbabwe and Pan-African Liberation. Elich, Gregory. The Battle over Zimbabwe’s Future. Elich, Gregory. Zimbabwe’s Fight for Justice. Gowans, Stephen. Ethiopia, Zimbabwe and the “Politics of Naming”. Gowans, Stephen. Zimbabwe’s Lonely Fight for Justice.

Prison is Good for Black Men

Repost from the old site. Oh, I know, I know, I know, you’re all mad about the headline. But don’t go away, not yet anyway. Do allow me to explain. Prison is not a great place. It’s not even a good place. It’s not even a fair or ok place. I’ve been in jail for six hours in my life, and my wimpy middle-class White-boy self is still traumatized. At least the memories kept me on the right side of the law. I do not ever want to go back there, not even for a minute. If only arrest had this effect on everyone… But Blacks, I think especially Black men (I don’t think there are a lot of Black females in prison) seem to handle it ok. Don’t ask me how they do it. Maybe you learn some real life survival skills growing up in the hood. Black men in prison have a much lower death rate, than those living outside. Inside, it is 206 per 100,000/yr and outside, it is 484 per 100,000/yr., a 5 This is a fact. A fact that won’t go away. That stares us in the face and demands to be recognized, parsed, anything but ignored. The lower death rate in prisons is not so much a tribute to our obviously horrible prison system, which frequently denies the heavily-Black prison population access to basic medical treatment, among other things. More than that, this is a stark, punch in the face reminder of just how deadly life in the hood really is for the Black male. There are a million ways to dissect this data, including some really nasty and racist ones. Google will direct you to those if you look hard enough, or you can just use your imagination. Let’s look at some real reasons why a Black man statistically stands much better chance of surviving in prison than on the street. Prison health care, crappy as it is, is maybe still better than the zero health care many Blacks get outside of prison. And it’s hard to take a lot of drugs and drink a lot inside prison. You can do a bit of both, but not much. Despite all the talk about prison violence, there is strict gun control inside prison. Guns are deadly for Black men outside of prison, where they are six times more likely to be felled by bullets than non-Blacks. And maybe there is plenty of time and motivation to exercise, and perhaps the prison diet is not deliberately unhealthy. In addition, one is removed from many things that can kill you, like vehicles and machinery. Black males are especially likely to die in vehicle accidents compared to other races. As long as Black men are living longer inside prison, and as long as so many are in there anyway, can we maybe make it a nicer place to stay for them? Maybe dorm-style rooms and more conjugal visits for promising, well-behaved prisoners? If the disintegration of Black life in the hood continues at this pace, we may even reach the outrageous point at some point in the future where Black men may want to voluntarily check themselves into prison to live a longer and more healthy life. Let us now imagine a future world where the hood was so bleak that Black males were volunteering for prison, if only for a chance to survive. In this theoretical case, could we make it more pleasant for the voluntaries, if there were any? Could we design special prisons for them – the voluntary prisons? Check out any time you like, prisons? And how would we make it begin to pay for itself, or at least not be a money pit? Dorm-style rooms, TV and movies, jobs for good wages, all the conjugal visits you want…I know this sounds like sick comedy, but these are human lives we are talking about here. How could we justify the costs? Life in the hood, with Black men sick, injured and dying young, are all costs to society. Healthy Black men in the voluntary prison, capable of working, living a more normal lifespan, may cost society less. Even here, most Black males will choose freedom over chains. More than demonstrating the humanity of US prisons, this appalling statistic is one more metric showing the utter unlivability of the Black ghetto. For White and Hispanic men, prison is a little more deadly than life on the outside, but not much. Great discussion here , with talk of possible bias, reasons for the disparity, etc. Interesting liberal take on this issue, from which I may quote and agree:

While prisoners’ rights and care are imperative, it is a disheartening paradox that being in jail decreases mortality.

But the reasons quoted in that paper are somewhat absurd – the reason why more Black men die on the outside? Racism? And there is less or no racism inside prison? Sometimes liberals, to paraphrase Gallagher, embarrass me.

Black IQ Gains in Britain, Kenya and Dominica

Repost from the old site.

A recent post of mine noted that the Black IQ in the US has shown gains of about 5.5 points against Whites in both children and adults. At age 12, the Black IQ is now 90.5, as opposed to 85 30 years ago. Black adult IQ’s have risen from 79 to 84.5 during the same period.

At the same time, Blacks have shown major gains in achievement test results relative to Whites. They narrowed the achievement gap by about 3

Rising IQ’s over time are referred to as the Flynn Effect (FE). In Britain, the results are even better. West Indian Blacks in the UK now have an IQ of about 93.5 at age 11. Scores for adult Caribbeans in the UK are not known. Studies from 1960’s-70’s showed an IQ of 85 for these same children, but now it has moved up by 8.5 points. Young Caribbean Blacks in the UK have closed the IQ gap by more than half.

Interestingly, this IQ increase has coincided with a spectacular increase in crime among these British-born Jamaicans. The first generation that came in the 1950’s and 60’s were mostly hard-working and law-abiding. But their offspring in many ways have been a disaster.

Here we see once again the phenomenon discussed on this blog before, that the male children of low-wage immigrants to the West are often criminals. This even held for the offspring of Irish, Italian and some Jewish Whites to the US over 100 years ago. With a rising IQ coinciding with a skyrocketing crime rate, again we see the disconnect between the simplistic game that White Nationalists play called “low IQ = high crime”.

Most Caribbean Blacks in the UK are Jamaicaans. In Jamaica, the Black IQ is about 71.5.

A counterargument to these rising Jamaican IQ gains is that these Jamaicans are heavily intermarrying with Whites. In the first generation, up to 2

But let us look at the argument. If base Jamaican IQ is 71.5, then a 2

A good analysis of the UK Jamaican data is that, if assuming the benefit of increased White genes, the more complex modern environment in the UK is raising Jamaican IQ by 5-10 points. In another score 92 at that age, both scores in comparison to a White score of 100. The Black US score then declines to 85 (a 10 point drop) and the African Black score drops to 67 (an incredible 25 point drop). Black scores decline as children age, and this recent post suggests that an initial high score followed by sharply declining scores are indicative of earlier maturation among Blacks. I do not know to what extent early Black maturation (Blacks do mature earlier, and this has a genetic basis) explains the strange phenomenon of high Black IQ’s in small children which rapidly decline into adulthood.

But it is interesting that Tizard’s group raised together in an institutional setting, the young Black kids had even higher IQ’s than the Whites.

In the Caribbean nation of Dominica, there has been a stunning rise in IQ over a 36 year period from 1965-2001. There was an 18 point rise during this period, which rose their IQ’s from 61 to 73 (the IQ’s did not rise by 18 points because other groups’ IQ’s were also rising during this period). This represents a gain against UK Whites of 12 IQ points.

The test used was Raven’s Progressive Matrices, a test that is said to be the best available for measuring pure “g” intelligence.

A schematic of the g, or general intelligence, factor. The ovals represent subtests on an intelligence test. G is a correlation coefficient of various tests. It measures the tendency of superior test takers (and someone who has a brain that works a bit better), where if they do well on one test, they also tend to do well on all other tests. The
FE is generally not on g because some tests have risen dramatically, others moderately, and still others little or not at all. Therefore, intelligence has not risen in a general, across-the-board kind of way. However, certain aspects of intelligence have definitely risen, and those aspects would seem to me to have quantifiable benefits in modern society occupationally, academically, and in other ways.

 

It also predicts success in life in various ways pretty well and is not culturally biased in any way. The researchers gave a vocabulary test to the group and found a similar rise of about 18 IQ points on that test.

Researchers tried to tease out which factors were most related to the IQ rise. The only factor that explained the rise fairly well was schooling, so it appeared that improved schooling was a major cause of the IQ rise. The IQ rise occurred at the time of a major expansion of the school system in Dominica.

Socioeconomic status of parents explained about 1

These findings are interesting for many reasons. This post suggests that most of the FE is due to increased caloric intake among children, resulting in earlier maturation. Improved nutrition has often been suggested as a reason for the FE but did not seem to be a factor here.

Those who favor a genetic explanation for racial variations in IQ (nearly all of whom are White racists) disparage all societal interventions to increase IQ as worthless. In particular, they oppose spending any more money on educating “inferior” Blacks and Browns, as it is just throwing good money after bad. This study indicates that increased educational spending can indeed have IQ benefits for Blacks.

Some other findings in this study are of interest. One is that the rise is on the Raven’s test, which is the most heavily g -loaded test in existence. Critics of the FE claim that the rise is not on g, or general intelligence, and hence it is worthless. The Dominican rise was definitely on g.

In the West, while there have been major rises in tests of problem-solving, visual analysis, visual intelligence, and verbal analysis, there have been little to no gains in general knowledge, vocabulary, arithmetic, and mathematical analysis.

Some interpret this to mean that there has been no rise in general intelligence – only a rise in “factors subject to environmental bias.” Such an analysis is false – but it is interesting that in Dominica such huge gains are being seen in vocabulary, while in the West, vocabulary gains have only been 4.4 points over 80 years.

A study out of Kenya in 2003 looking at 7 year old children found an incredible 26 point gain over 14 years from 1984-1998 in rural Kenya, leaving them with an IQ of 89 (Daley et al 2003). This apparently represented a 21 point IQ gain over British Whites from the previous IQ of 68.

The rise was correlated with schooling, family structure, nutrition, and the health of the children. Schooling seemed to be the major factor and once again coincided with a major educational expansion by the government. The test used was the children’s version of Raven’s, the Children’s Progressive Matrices, once again a very g-loaded test, so the Kenyan rise was also on g.

The Kenyan, UK, and Dominican studies are important because they show Blacks reducing the Black-White IQ gap by 10-15 points in a few decades. Hereditarians argue that the Black-White gap is permanent in all areas of the world, and that Blacks are a hopelessly stupid race – a drain on humanity. All money spent on raising Black IQ’s is wasted for this reason.

The three studies above show purely environmental factors causing major reductions in the Black-White IQ gap.

Another study found massive gains, that I have not been able to quantify, in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, over a 72-74 year period. The gains were probably at least on the order of 20 points. Researchers suggested that increased cognitive stimulation in the form of a more complex world was responsible for the rise.

A common complaint of all of these studies showing rising Black IQ’s, both in tandem with Whites and in closing the Black-White gap, is that the studies are done only on children. But most IQ tests are done on kids. Taking African studies as an example, we can see here that 6

In my opinion, testing kids is probably a better way to measure pure neurological efficiency without throwing in all sorts of potentially confounding extraneous variables.

Adults are much more likely than kids to have physical and mental diseases (schizophrenia and depression lower IQ), to be in jail, prison, or homeless, to abuse alcohol and drugs, or to have suffered serious head injuries. All of these factors throw a monkey wrench into tests that should be trying to show us real differences between races.

Just today, the White Nationalist blog Majority Rights posted a well-done article by Richard D. Fuerle, A Possible Explanation for the Flynn Effect. The article’s interesting premise is that the FE is due to increased caloric intake and even increasing obesity in our modern world. This increased food intake would result in earlier maturation and higher IQ’s among children, which would then level off in adulthood.

The author suggests that the FE is not really an IQ increase but an effect of this early maturation, and that people are getting less intelligent, not more so.

I believe this theory is wrong, though it has an interesting premise. James Flynn also disagrees with Fuerle’s article, saying that the author was led astray, as he did not have good knowledge of the literature. Flynn also disagreed with the notion that the FE was only in children and that it leveled off in adulthood, saying that he had refuted this in an article his famous article published in JEM: The Journal of Educational Measurement, in 1984 (Flynn 2008).

Some of the comments following Fuerle’s article are also not correct.

First of all, IQ’s have been rising among all age groups, not just kids. It’s really a cohort effect. James Flynn agreed with me (Flynn 2007) that Black adults of today have the same IQ scores (100) as the Whites of 1957. Blacks of today have somewhat higher scores than the Whites of WW2.

This brings up a conundrum as one wonders if today’s US Blacks would have been able to beat the Japanese in WW2, since they can’t even seem to run Detroit (Taylor 2007). This long and rather involved post of mine deals with a lot of the arguments around the FE, including some of the misconceptions about it. My post theorizing that Blacks of today equal the Whites of 1957 is here.

Here, I show that Black children and adults have indeed made about a 5.5 IQ point gain on Whites over the past 30 years, coinciding with the liberation of Blacks via Civil Rights laws. The notion that IQ has risen due to increased caloric intake is interesting but probably invalid. Flynn himself says that after 1950, gains due to nutrition were minimal to nil in the West.

Furthermore, the gains should have been across the board, not just in the certain areas that the FE is in. As we see above, the FE is also occurring in 3rd World countries like Kenya and Dominica where excess nutrition is certainly not an issue. In those countries, it is related to better education, if anything. Much of the FE remains mysterious.

The notion that gains are occurring only in certain areas that are “subject to environmental bias” is not correct. First of all, in Dominica, huge gains were seen in vocabulary, one of the areas that is not seeing much gain in the West.

Vocabulary, general knowledge, basic math, and mathematical analysis are all subject to environmental influence too, but Western society has not been promoting these areas so much.

The areas that the FE is occurring in – verbal analysis, analytical reasoning, visual analysis, visuospatial reasoning, on-the-spot problem solving for which no previous method was known, etc. – are areas that our increasingly sophisticated society has been promoting.

We have promoted this in terms of an increasingly complex society and the mass promotion of scientific thinking. The visuospatial aspect may be due to video games, cell phones, computers, and many things that need programming – boom boxes, car radios, microwaves, answering machines, thermostats, on and on.

My personal opinion is that TV has a lot to do with it. TV shows are increasingly complex, and kids sit in front of TVs with clickers clicking through 50 different channels one after the other. The camera usually only focuses on something for a short time, then moves on. Even jokes and dialog on TV come at a rapid pace. Movies seem to have gotten a lot more complex in recent decades too.

Lastly, the FE is only ending or reversing in Scandinavia. It is still going full blast in the US and in the 3rd world.

The notion that IQ is rising while “real intelligence” – general knowledge, math and vocabulary – is not cannot be supported. Those three things are no more “real intelligence” than the stuff that is going up in the FE.

Another argument advanced later in the discussion has to do with Malcolm Gladwell’s misreading of the FE. Gladwell says that the gains have been almost exclusively on a subtest of the WISC called Similarities. Although gains on Similarities reflect increased use of scientific thinking in our society, these gains are disparaged in the comments section as showing a phony effect of increased intelligence when there has been none.

First of all, the commenters are wrong in that gains on Similarities are a meaningless artifact. Similarities tests for the ability to solve problems on-the-spot without a previously learned method. Raven’s tests for the same thing – it is said to test for the “ability to make sense of the buzzing confusion of life.” Second, Gladwell is wrong. Major gains have occurred on many tests, not just Similarities:

Look at the gains:

Similarities         23.45
Picture Arrangement  21.5
Coding               18
Object Assembly      17.35
Block Design         15.9
Picture Completion   11.7
Comprehension        11
Vocabulary           4.4
Arithmetic           2.3
Information          2.1

A nice photo of James Flynn, along with Richard Lynn and Philippe Rushton, from an obscure document reporting on a conference on intelligence in Amsterdam last year, is here. The link also features a short, interesting interview with Flynn along with some interesting abstracts on intelligence.

Some abstracts I found interesting were those showing that the more intelligent people are, the less likely they are to believe in God. Also, among believers, the more intelligent people were, the more liberal and less literal they were in their beliefs. These findings also applied at a national and ethnic level.

Other abstracts showed that the more intelligent people are, they longer they live and the healthier they are. A recent finding not in the document was that in the West, the smarter you are, the more likely you are to be a vegetarian.

References

Daley, Y. C.; Whaley, S. E.; Sigman, M. D.; Espinosa, M. P.; and Neuman, C. (2003). “IQ On the Rise: The Flynn effect in Rural Kenyan Children.” Psychological Science 14, 215-219.
Flynn, James R. (November 2007). Personal communication.
Flynn, James R. (January 2008). Personal communication.
Keita, Lamin. (December 2007). Personal communication.
Nisbett, R. E. (1998). “ Robert LindsayPosted on Categories Africa, Americas, Asia, Blacks, Brazil, Britain, Caribbean, China, Civil Rights, Crime, Culture, Dominica, East Africa, Europe, Europeans, Flynn Effect, Genetics, Health, History, Immigration, Intelligence, Jamaicans, Kenya, Latin America, Nutrition, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, South America, White Nationalism, White Racism, Whites27 Comments on Black IQ Gains in Britain, Kenya and Dominica

Gun Deaths Comparison

Gun deaths per 100000 pop. in comparison to US
Country    Year  Homicide        Suicide
US         2001  3.98            5.92
Canada     2002  0.40 10x lower  2.00 3x lower
Australia  2001  0.24 17x lower  1.34 5x lower
UK         2002  0.15 27x lower  0.20 30x lower

The UK has the strictest gun laws. The gun nuts have no argument. They just want to keep their guns, because the guns make them feel safer. But the gun is about 30 X more likely to be used in the home in a suicide or homicide than to defend the person. It’s not worth it to keep those things around. Personally, I do not want one of those blasted things anywhere near me.

Cultural Anthropology and Physics Envy

Repost from the old site. A Christmas Day New York Times article by George Johnson, A Question of Blame When Societies Fall, has elicited quite a bit of comment in the blogosphere. The article concerns Jared Diamond, anthropologist and popular author of two recent books on cultures, Guns, Germs and Steel and Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. The first deals with why societies succeed, and the second deals with why societies fail. First of all, I have read neither book, but I did read parts of Collapse, specifically the chapter on the Rwanda genocide. Diamond placed the blame for the genocide on a logical Malthusian theory that population had outstripped food supply which resulted in massacre to reduce the human population so there would once again be enough food and land to go around. It seemed reasonable at the time, and it still does now. Other than that, I have not read a lot of Diamond. He did some good work on the Proto Indo-European homeland though, which he logically places in the Southern Ukraine. The article discusses how the politically correct have rendered cultural anthropology into something pretty silly these days. This state of affairs was a culmination of a series of events in the history of anthropological theory over the past century. In the first half of the 1900’s, there was still a trend in anthropology, the Great Chain of Being, to see European culture as the pinnacle and to judge all cultures in relation to how far they had climbed up the European ladder. At the same time, Franz Boas and Margaret Mead were working at cross-purposes to the implied White Supremacism of the Great Chain of Being. racist voodoo doll for the PC crowd to stick pins in. Sigh. Steve Sailer weighs in, defending Diamond, and GNXP tosses out a nearly incomprehensible post about Johnson’s piece. In GNXP‘s post and in the long and equally difficult comments section, GNXP authors and commenters thrash away at cultural anthropology. For examples of the sort of stuff that gets their goat, see these links here, here , GNXP comments thread Robert F. G. Spier, who had done his PhD dissertation on the tribe wanted to know what the tribe had thought of his work. I told him they had not even read it, and to tell the truth, many tribal members were hostile to him, as they were to all anthropologists. He was crushed, but he said, cynically, that he understood. Just to show you what we are up against. Now, with all the hostility these Indians have towards the well-meaning anthros of the past, you can see how we need to tread carefully around our informants. Our rep is bad enough as it is. It’s painfully important to show love and compassion towards the people that we study. In the course of my work, I read through all of the anthropological data assembled by the anthros of the past. There was a ton of great info in there. When I presented my findings to to top Indians in order to turn the work into a book – an ethnography of the tribe, the whole project was cruelly shot down. The elders had created a myth whereby they had outsmarted the evil White anthros by telling them a pack of lies, thereby getting back at them and thwarting their whole wicked Whitey project. All the anthropological work was contaminated. Even if it were not all lies, we could not tell where the lies began and the truth ended. Not one word could be written. The project was shelved; I was crushed, angry, embittered and cynical, yet with my background in psychology, I sadly understood the defenses working behind the Indians’ views. At this point, my project became a scientific one. Was it actually true that the Indians had told the anthros a pack of lies to get one over on the evil White man? I worked on this question for months (while doing many other things). I read a lot more material and talked to anthropologists all over the country. I read and re-read the materials and compared them to each other. My hypothesis was: No, the Indians had not lied to the anthros. This hypothesis had to be rejected. There were clearly cases of lying, but they were easily spotted and isolated. I fleshed out most of them and just accepted the rest as the best truth we could find. The various ethnologies by anthros trotting through every couple decades lined up extremely well. The few questions that the Indians questioned so ferociously – “Did the Indians eat rattlesnakes, gopher snakes and skunks?” was one – were identified as painfully obvious cases of psychological defenses. Nowadays, the Indians think eating skunks is terrible, as skunks stink. The meat doesn’t stink, but it is oily yet edible. The aboriginal Indians may well have eaten skunks, but probably not often. We need to consider that aboriginal Indians probably readily ate any decent-tasting small animal that they could easily capture and kill. Skunks are easy to kill, and the meat is ok enough to eat if you are hungry. Modern Indians recoil at the idea of eating gopher snakes and rattlesnakes, as one lives in the dirt and “tastes dirty”, and the other is poisonous. I concluded that both snakes were eaten, and that gopher snakes do not taste dirty, as this is illogical thinking based on the notion that if something lives in the dirt it must taste like the dirt. There were other empirical questions: What was the religion of the Indians? Nowadays, the local Indians were passionate Christians, and believed in something called the Great Spirit, the Great Creator, or the Creator. But was that an aboriginal belief? Once again, the question lingered over months of intensive research, hypothesis-testing and scientific back and forths. I finally concluded that the aboriginal Indians were animists for whom the world, and everything in it, was alive with electric energy. The rocks, the trees, everything…a life force flowed through it all. The Indians used various magical items to tap into this magical world of spirits. Curiously, animism is not incompatible with modern science. As particle physics says that we are all part of everything else, and any two particles in contact will tend to spin together for the rest of their existence, there is a spinning and buzzing subatomic tapestry that links us all together as one. My body does not end where yours begins, and I am still connected to my ex-girlfriend Tracy from 1978, if she is still alive, as our particles continue to spin in tandem. When an Indian died, a ceremony was held to see the spirit off to the Land of the Dead, which lay to the West. This ceremony was observed by Edward Curtis in 1878, 28 years after major contact, so it was probably aboriginal. The aboriginal Indian God was described to me by a fellow anthropologist, Sylvia Broadbent, as a Deus Obtusa, or Lazy God . It was not important at all in their lives, but it did create the world, after which it did not do much of anything, except perhaps every once in a while when it got off its ass to yawn and intervene trivially in our affairs a bit before heading back to the cosmic bong hits. I believe that the Great Creator belief of the Plains diffused out as a general “Indian” belief in God, and rapidly Christianizing Indians all over the US picked up on it and adapted it for their own. The reason for this diffusion was the Christianization of the Indians and their exposure to the omniscient and omnipresent God of Christianity. In order to adopt this new Christian God to the Indian World, the Great Creator concept was adopted via cultural diffusion from Plains tribes. At this point, most US Indians are passionate Christians, and most will insist that they always believed in a “Great Creator”. If you dispute this, you ask for a fight. The truth, I believe, is as described above. Along the same lines, some of the Indian stories I was working with were the characteristic myths of the California Indians, dealing with various animal Gods. These myths explained how various things came to be, how the Earth was created, how fire was discovered, etc. The myths date back to a time before there were people, when various animals, in the form of “Animal Gods”, and not the animals themselves as we now know them, roamed the Earth. This was the time of Stinkbug, Turtle, Coyote, Mountain Lion, Bear, Bobcat, Duck, and many other “Animal Gods”. I talked to a high-ranking Karuk Indian and asked him whether he actually believed all this stuff. He got very angry (as Indians often do when you challenge their beliefs) and insisted it was all literally true. Then I set off on a quest to see to what extent the California Indians had actually believed in these animal myths aboriginally. After a while, the best response I found came from a brilliant linguist named Sydney Lamb at Rice University, who told me that the aboriginal Indians didn’t really believe any of that stuff. Instead, those stories were more like the Saturday morning cartoons, or fairy tales you tell to little kids. What is curious is how stories that were aboriginally seen as “Saturday cartoons” have now been adopted as literal truth by much more scientific-minded modern Indians, and that these modern Indians also insist that this literal belief was also held aboriginally. There were other questions. The existence of a Yokuts tribe called the Dalinchi. The local elders passionately insisted that this was not a tribe, but was merely the name of a village, and got angry when I suggested otherwise. Looking through old mission records, a linguist friend of mine found Yokuts Indians who gave their tribe as Dalinchi. They probably would not have done so if that was only a village name. The existence of a Yokuts tribe called Dumna was questioned, and locals stated that it did not exist, in part because cynically, the locals wished to claim Dumna land as their own, mostly so they could build a casino on it. There was a lot of anthropological work on the Dumna, especially a great book by Frank Latta, but most crucially once again, my linguist professor friend found old mission records where Indians gave their tribe as Dumna. The local Indians asked me to draw a map of tribal boundaries. Between other work, I spent a few months on this, poring over all sorts of maps, new and old, and old ethnologies and reports. I eventually mapped out a tentative boundary for the tribe. As with most California tribes in this area, it didn’t go very far, and it didn’t go down to the San Joaquin River where they wanted me to draw the line. Close? Yes, but not to the river. Why did they want me to draw the line to the river? So they could build a casino there! The tribe got angry at my conclusions as I had discovered the “wrong facts”, and for a bit it seemed my job was on the line. I insisted that I was a scientist, and scientifically, I could not compromise by scientific ethics for a political agenda. They seemed to accept the basic morality of my stubborn stand, and backed down. The various empirical questions that I dealt with in the course of my work as a cultural anthropologist are bolded above. I do resent GNXP and to a much lesser extent Sailer (who is mostly just guilty of ignorance and thinking in the same way one “skims” a book) saying that cultural anthropology is not a science, that the scientific method is not used, that we make no hypotheses, nor do we test them, nor we do we make tentative conclusions that we continually readjust in the face of new evidence. I defy any of the arrogant hard science types in Robert LindsayPosted on Categories Africa, Americas, Amerindians, Anthropology, Anti-Racism, Blacks, California, Christianity, Civil Rights, Crime, Cultural, Culture, Europe, Europeans, Genetics, History, Intelligence, Left, Linguistics, North America, Pacific, Polynesia, Psychology, Race Realism, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, Scholarship, Science, Ukraine, USA, Useless Western Left, West, Whites3 Comments on Cultural Anthropology and Physics Envy

Street Gangs of Melbourne

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ly4qk0FvEC0&feature=related] Interesting that these are mostly Whites. The gang members are apparently all Lebanese Muslims. They also rape women, often European White women, similar to the behavior of the Muslims of Europe who are from Iraq, North Africa and Somalia. Curiously, there are also many Lebanese Christians in Australia, but they cause almost zero problems. Once again, it looks like the main factor driving the gang crime is the presence of Muslims in a Western society. For some reason, young Muslims in the West are often angry at infidel society and lash out by engaging in crime and forming gangs. These gangs seem somewhat lightweight compared to our Black and Hispanic gangs, possibly due to strict gun control in Australia, but nevertheless, they don’t seem like very nice people. 15 gang stabbings in a weekend, even in a big city, is quite a few. Whose bright idea was it to bring these idiots into the West?

Genocide in Australia

Repost from the old site. Looks like it was way worse than the genocide of the Amerindians in the US. The wiping out of the Amerindians was done mostly by disease. The much-repeated story of blankets poisoned with smallpox apparently occurred in once, back East. There was a large poisoning of maybe 200-300 Amerindians in the Shasta area of California in the 1800’s, and there was a massacre of 200-300 Amerindians near Eureka at the same time. California was actually one of the worst places of all. There was an all-out war against the Amerindians here. I spent months going over old newspaper archives in a library as part of work I did for an Indian tribe here in the Sierras (now doing great with a casino). In the 1850’s and 1860’s, the California Indians were fighting back. The governor himself was making wild proclamations about how this war a war of one race against another, a war that had to lead to the extinction of one or the other. For 15-20 years or so, it was more or less legal to kill any Indian you wanted in the Sierras and Northern California and for any reason. You could rape an Indian woman too if you want to, and take an Indian child captive. All of this was more or less legal. Of course this was taking place against the backdrop of the utterly insane mass criminality and homicide of the California Gold Rush, a crime wave the likes of which the state has never even come close to seeing since. Too many young unmarried men, hardly any women, few to no families, lots of money in the form of gold, little law enforcement, all the ingredients were there. The law that existed was a brutal one, and men were hanged right and left in the Gold Rush for all sorts of things, but preying on Indians was not one of them. On Sundays, the men would all go to church, then they would head back to the camps to drink, take drugs, steal, fight, kill and just in general act like animals. There were regular hangings at the camps, and these were well-attended. Folks would go watch the hangings, then head back to camp to commit more crimes later that evening. Sometimes, even capital punishment just doesn’t cut it. Recall the stories of the pickpockets that roamed through the crowds in England at the hangings. This was when pickpocketing was a capital offense. Until 1870 or so, an Indian in this part of the state kept his head down and his mouth shut and hoped to stay alive. Epidemics and disease took their toll. By 1890, 9 That’s interesting to folks who insist that genetic change in humans takes a long time. Not necessarily, when something happens that kills 9 Those who tally such things say that ultimately, Whites killed 7,000 Indians and Indians killed about 11,000 Whites. It’s true, the Indians were could be brutal and women and children were at times killed, but they also often kidnapped them and made them members of the tribe. There are a couple of stories in my family about encounters with Indians. These all stem from one line of my family, who actually came over with the first invaders on the Second Ship of the Mayflower. Sometime in the 1640’s in Massachusetts, Indians attacked the village where all the men were off hunting. They rounded up the women and children and prepared to set fire to them. Some of the women started singing a pretty song, and the Indians stopped to listen. Well, this was long enough for the menfolk to return, chase off the Indians and save the day. Two of my ancestors were in that group, a woman and her young child. Later, in late 1700’s Virginia, one of my relatives was taken captive by Indians with his friend. They made them run the gauntlet, a popular thing that Indians liked to do with captured Whites. As you ran the gauntlet, the Indians beat on you. Well, the friend was apparently killed in this process. My ancestor, though, when prodded to run the gauntlet, started jumping around and squawking like a chicken. The Indians all started laughing and decided he did not have to run the gauntlet. I’m not sure if it’s the same story, but one of my ancestors at one point was either captured by Indians or joined them. This in late 1700’s Virginia again. His family just gave him up for dead. Well, 10 years later, the son returns home, about 30 years old, and he’s walking up to his father’s house all dressed like an Indian. His father got out his gun and was ready to shoot his own son until he recognized him. Back in those days, if an Indian was coming onto your property, you shot him. My family goes back to 1600’s Virginia and it’s said that if you can trace your line back that far, you have a 5 The first two stories are probably apocryphal. If you notice the themes: clever Whites use their ingenuity (and common human nature) to fool the Indians by disarming them and appealing to their sensibilities for comedy and appreciation of music. As the Indian is a barbarian savage in both tales, at the same time, he is a fellow human, revealed by his ability to appreciate a clever joke or a beautiful song. At the end of the day, there is really no way to figure out if such stories are true or not. But they got passed down through the family for years for a reason that is at once egotistical and at the same time a warning: our line is a clever line, able to cheat death by our wits. Remember this, and use this lesson in the close calls you may experience in your own dangerous times. The treatment of the Aborigines looks like a real genocide. There were sterilization attempts, deliberate attempts at “breeding them out”, mass imprisonments for minor infractions, infantilization throughout life by being confined to child-care like institutions where even their shit had to pass muster. In these homes, both sexes experienced mass sex abuse, and this went on for decades. Single women were not allowed to have sex, and males were punished for being a “menace to White women”. Half-breeds were taken away to be raised by Whites, and many Aboriginal children were stolen from their families. There was a conscious attempt to make this race fade into history. There are not many full-blooded Aboriginals left. There are not that many in cities, and most are in remote areas. They still have very serious problems, but they are hardly any kind of threat to the rest of Australians in any way. At the moment, alcohol and drugs are the worst problems, and fetal alcohol syndrome is epidemic among them. The damaged children are petty criminals and find it hard to function on their own. When the Whites first showed up, Aboriginals were waging their own war of extinction on the Negritos of Australia, who may have been there even before the Aborigines showed. The Negritos are the first people out of Africa 70,000 years ago, who moved along the Indian Ocean to SE Asia, leaving trace populations (or relatives) behind (possibly) in Yemen, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Andaman Islands, Malaysia, the Philippines and New Guinea.

The journey taken by early man out of Africa 70,000 years ago. As you can see, one line goes to Australia. Negritos, not Aborigines, were probably the first people in Australia.

The first Whites witnessed Aborigines hunting Negritos the way man would hunt wild animals. They were killed just for the pleasure of it, and because they were small. Early investigations A photo of Australian Negritos from the Cairns rainforest, taken in 1890, found by Tindale in 1937. He went looking for some Negritos in the area and found a few of them. I haven’t seen any genetic studies on these people, since there are few if any of them left, but studies did seem to show that like most Negritos, they are most closely related genetically to the people around them, in this case, the Aborigines.

Native Tasmanians are now apparently extinct. They were also hunted like animals for decades. The people that we commonly know as Aborigines (or at least one group called Carpentarians named for the Gulf of Carpentaria in Northern Australia) seem to have come much later from Southern India (and seem related to the Veddoids) and largely replaced the Negritos, a genocide that was in its final phases when the Whites showed up.

Indo-Melanid Yanadi boys in Southern India. Note the resemblance with Aborigines. Unfortunately, cranial studies do not show a relationship with Veddoid types and Aborigines. However, genes did seem to show a link a while back. Nevertheless, cranially and surely genetically, these Yanadis are Caucasians. They may be some of the most ancient Caucasians of them all. It’s fascinating to think that the Aborigines as we know them are the original people, but were actually later arrivals from India and the Pacific Rim respectively.

The Carpentarians showed up about 15,000 years ago, were darker and had little body hair. A classic Aborigine, probably a cross between an Ainu type and an early South Indian type. These types were generalized across India and SE Asia about 24,000 years ago. Another group, called Murrayians, are apparently related to the Ainu, and arrived 20,000 years ago. The Ainu are thought to be the remnants of the original people of Northern Asia. They were stocky, wavy-haired, hairy, and fairly light-skinned.

A photo of Ainu Yasli Adam in traditional garb. I love this photo. Note that he could be mistaken for an Aborigine or a Caucasian. Anthropological studies suggest that Ainu types showed up in Australia about 20,000 years ago. There seems to be evidence of them in Thailand around 16,000 years ago, and about this time they went to Japan to form a very early Japanese culture called the Jomonese. There is a suggestion that proto-Jomonese people were also in Thailand around this time. At the same time, the Americas were being populated by types that best resemble the Ainu. These are the Paleoindians, and the Amerindians today are no relation, no matter how much they scream. The famous Kennewick Man is also a Paleoindian most closely related to an Ainu or a Maori. He only appears Caucasian because the Ainu types do look Caucasian. However, in facial structure, they are Australoid, and genetically, they are Asians. Complete moron White nationalists claim that Kennewick Man is a White Man, and this proves that Whites were here before Amerindians, and therefore the whole continent is ours. Stupid or what? I’m going to do a whole post taking these clowns to task over this. In traditional early anthropology of the Philippines, a group called the proto-Malay is postulated. They arrived after the Negritos and after an Australoid group called Sakais, who seem to resemble Veddoids or the Senoi of Malaysia. The proto-Malay are described as short and very hairy. A hairy Asian sounds like an Ainu, and indeed, there were Jomon types in Thailand, and Ainu types may have settled Australia 20,000 years ago, and the Americas 12,000 years ago. In short, Ainu types were on the move around the Pacific Rim from 12-20,000 years ago, and may even have settled in the Philippines. This is real cutting-edge stuff here and I am totally going out on a limb. Feel free to dive in.

An Australian fossil called Kow Swamp from 20,000 YBP curiously looks more like Homo Erectus than Homo Sapiens. The Negritos were least advanced, then the Murrayians, then the Carpentarians. Tindale and Birdsell did the best work on the peopling of Australia long ago and much of it stands to this day. In between the 1960’s saw such idiocies as pan-Aboriginalism, which mandated that all Aborigines had to come from a single source. Ridiculous theories postulated Negritos not as ancient remnants of the first modern humans in their regions, but as the result of microevolution (in particular, to living in a rain forest) and evolutionary drift. This same scenario plays out in Africa, where Bantus kill Pygmies just for the fun of it, and take special pleasure in eating them. This old habit has come back with the horrible civil war in Zaire that has killed 5 million people. In the Philippines, Negritos have been murdered by settlers for their land for decades now, with few legal consequences. The remainder are a defeated people, their lands stolen by Filipinos, working for Filipinos on their former lands as agricultural labor, living in squatter villages, families falling apart, riven by alcohol, dope and even pornography.

A full-grown Ati woman. The Ati, a Philippines Negrito group, live on Panay Island, where they number about 1,500. The Filipinos have been stealing their land and killing them when they resist for decades now, and the government could care less. The Negritos of the Philippines are starting to look like a defeated race.

On the Andaman Islands, most of the Negritos have gone extinct due to disease. The few remainders, for some odd reason, are afflicted with very low fertility, that is, the women seem to be unable to bear children. Is this nature’s way of marking the extinction of a race?

Andaman Islands Negritos. Contact with advanced civilization is fatal to them. They have some immunity to malaria, but none to Hepatitis, venereal diseases or even the common cold or the flu. They quickly succumb to venereal disease, violent crime, beggary, and sloth upon contact with modern civilization. There is a group on the Sentinel Islands that attacks all researchers who come near. Indian nationalist fuckheads keep sending expeditions to “bring them into civilization” but every Andamans group that has come to the modern world has been destroyed. Long may the Sentinelese prosper in the Paleolithic glory. I actually think these Stone Age chicks are kinda cute. Hell with modern woman anyway. Every one I meet wants to know my net worth. Think these babes care? Hell with Late Capitalism, how do I get me one of these Negrito chicks anyway?

TNB in Wisconsin

Here. “Typical Negro Behavior”* in Wisconsin. Whenever you hear about something like this happening, it’s always and only Blacks, never any other race. Note that the comments indicate that the crowd was 10 Here is what happened. A group of 50-60 young people gathered outside the mall and raised a ruckus. Then they burst into the main mall door and ran amok in stores for 10 minutes, knocking over and attempting to destroy any merchandise in their path. They also smashed windows. They ran very quickly, so it was hard to stop them or catch them. Within 10 minutes, store owners had locked all of their front doors and security managed to get the punks out of the mall into the parking lot. In the parking lot, the general mayhem continued. A shot was fired, and an armed robbery was reported to police. Keep in mind that this was not a politically motivated riot. They were just destroying the mall for kicks, for fun, for a blast. Could you imagine 50-60 young Whites gathered outside a mall in the US, firing guns and committing armed robberies, who then burst into the mall and run amok in the mall for 10 minutes, trying to destroy any merchandise in their paths, and smashing any windows they could find along the way? I can’t imagine it, and I’ve never heard of it. Not only that, but I’ve never heard of any other race doing such things. Even Hispanics don’t stoop this low. Polynesians? Nope. Asians? Forget it. Name one other race that acts this way. One. This is exclusively Black behavior, from all I can tell. If someone can produce evidence of non-Blacks acting ever acting this way, please do so. *Typical Negro Behavior and its less pleasant related phrasings is in ugly term. For one thing, it isn’t necessarily typical Black behavior. But as it has evolved, TNB has come to mean the worst possible stereotypical Black behavior. It is in this sense that we will use it on this site. We are not trying to imply that the worst Black behavior is by any means typical for your average Black person.

Somalis Attack Humans

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3WjHg03j5o&feature=player_embedded] Here. The Blacks will soon say that White people do this too. Well, I grew up in White towns and I’ve lived in them most of my life. Yes, there is some bullying, but they target individual White boys, usually those who seem weak or soft in some way. So they might push down a White boy on a bike who seems weak or soft if they knew him. In the towns I lived in, I never heard of gangs of White teenagers carrying out random attacks of any sort for fun as we see in this video against strangers. It was simply not done. Keep in mind that I have lived 51 years of my life in White towns and I’ve never heard of such a thing. I don’t think Hispanics do this either. This seems to be a Black thing as best I can tell. I’ve heard no one of this behavior from Blacks. Why in God’s name did we bring these Somali Hell’s spawn into our country in the first place? I know that they are refugees, but can’t they go somewhere in Africa instead? Every Western country that has invited these people in as refugees has regretted it. Norway, Finland, the US…they act the same everywhere. I understand that in Finland, Somalis are now committing something like 9 Here is a quote from a Black American on the Youtube page:

Fucking no good Somali pieces of shit. If it wasn’t for us black Americans they wouldn’t even have civil rights in this country yet they come over here and destroy it. Those worthless, starving pieces of shit ape Somali monkeys need to all be deported back to poor as Somalia and let them die of starvation. Fuck Africans!

It sounds like it could have come from Stormfront!

Nice Sid Vicious Montage

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-fsf8cHiLU&feature=related] Tracks are Black Leather by the Professionals and Here We Go Again by the Sex Pistols. Sid Vicious was a complete asshole, but I love him anyway. He embodied the punk spirit very well. I still miss him. The story of the love affair between Sid and Nancy Spungeon is a sad one. After the Pistols broke up, Sid and Nancy moved to the Chelsea Hotel in New York and Sid tried to get his career going. They were both very heavily into drugs, in particular opiates and heroin. Nancy was found dead in Sid’s place with a single stab wound to the abdomen. Sid said he awoke from a drug stupor to find her dead in the bathroom. He gave conflicted reports at booking, claiming that he did it, then claiming that she fell on the knife, then saying that he loved her but she treated him like crap. They fought all the time and were both totally strung out on drugs. There are other stories claiming that a heroin dealer killed Nancy that night. Rockets Redglare is sometimes named as the killer. A dealer, he had delivered heroin to them that night. Another dealer was supposed to come over later. Redglare said he thought that that dealer had tried to rip off the drugs from them while Sid was passed out and ended up getting into it with Nancy. Surely the world of heroin dealers and heroin users in New York City is a sleazy one and ripoffs no doubt go down all the time. Most heroin addicts are after all thieves themselves. I would probably trust your average heroin dealer about as far as I could throw them. However, Nancy was stabbed with Sid’s very own knife. This mystery will probably never be solved. Redglare died in his early 50’s from a lifetime of drug abuse. His liver and kidneys were shot. He was an interesting person, and a movie about him has recently been made. Nancy Spungeon was a very mixed up person. A beautiful young Jewish woman, dead at age 20. At age 15, she was diagnosed with schizophrenia, but that can’t be correct. Borderline Personality Disorder is more like it. She was despised by the rest of the band for her unpleasant and abusive behavior. Sid was arrested for Nancy’s murder. Soon after, he attempted suicide by slitting his wrists. Four months later, there was a gathering celebrating Sid’s being released on bail. Sid’s Mom (!) sent him some heroin, although he had been clean for some time. Sid had began using drugs as a boy when he took up using speed with his speed using Mom. Sid shot the heroin that night in three doses. It was nearly pure heroin. He passed out with his new girlfriend and was found dead the next morning of heroin overdose. This very strange and sad story was immortalized in a move called Sid and Nancy, which is highly recommended.

Ring in the New Year with the Sex Pistols!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWAPe8S2hgA&feature=related] Recorded by the Sex Pistols in Brazil, with vocals by Ronald Biggs, a member of the Great Train Robbery gang escaped from prison and living on the lam in Brazil. Background on the song here. Background on Biggs here. Yes! Yes! Yes! No one is innocent! Yes! God save us all! Yes! Listening to the Sex Pistols, for a male of a certain age, is reliving a boy’s first orgasm over and over again. Lyrics: God save the Sex Pistols, they’re a bunch of wholesome blokes They just like wearing filthy clothes and swapping filthy jokes God save television, keep the programs pure God save William Grundy from falling in manure Ronnie Biggs was doing time until he done a bunk Now he says he’s seen the light and he sold his soul for punk God save Martin Boorman and Nazis on the run They wasn’t being wicked, God, that was their idea of fun God save Myra Hindley, God save Ian Brady Even though he’s horrible and she ain’t what you call a lady Ronnie Biggs was doing time until he done a bunk Now he says he’s seen the light and he sold his soul for punk Ronnie Biggs was doing time until he done a bunk Now he says he’s seen the light and he sold his soul for punk God save politicians, God save our friends, the pigs God save Idi Amin and God save Ronald Biggs God save all us sinners, God save your blackest sheep God save the good Samaritan and God save the worthless creep Ronnie Biggs was doing time until he done a bunk Now he says he’s seen the light and he sold his soul for punk Ronnie Biggs was doing time until he done a bunk Now he says he’s seen the light and he sold his soul He sold his soul, he sold his own soul, soul for punk

Judging Dangerousnous: Total Fail!

One of the things that I think is quite humorous is that people always insist that they can figure out who the dangerous people are. One thing I think most reasonable folks are good at are judging actually dangerous people to be dangerous. That is, there are not many false negatives in terms of dangerousness. Criminals, violent, bad and dangerous people look like criminals, violent, bad or dangerous people. At least the ones that victimize or prey on other human beings do. I’ve known many people like this in my life, and almost none of them looked like nice, harmless, sweet, kind, friendly people. Bad people look bad. Period. People who prey on others are predators. They tend to have a predatory look in their eyes. Their eyes and faces look hard and violent. In many cases, their eyes look completely empty and dead. In very few cases does a dangerous, violent, predatory criminal look like a nice, sweet, kind, harmless guy. Forget it. Now, in the case of nonviolent criminals or victimless crimes, many of them can seem like pretty nice people. That’s because all they are doing is selling dope or whatever. That doesn’t hurt anyone, so they don’t have to be cold or mean. They just have to break the law. However, one thing I have noticed is that people hopelessly fail in terms of false positives. I can’t tell how many people I have met who are the most harmless people you will ever meet, yet vast numbers of idiots think they are horribly dangerous. People are so afraid of them that they don’t want to allow them into stores, they shoo their kids inside when the guy comes outside, they refuse to talk to the person, cutting off any conversation soon after it starts, etc. It’s absolutely ridiculous, but it goes on all the time. People seem to continuously make false positives in terms of dangerousness. In other words, they correctly judge most dangerous people as dangerous, which is good, but they incorrectly judge many harmless people as also dangerous. In other words, they judge many more persons as dangerous than actually are. There’s nothing wrong with being on the safe side. People are so terrible about this that in general I think that humans’ ability to judge dangerousness in other humans is virtually worthless.

Strange Case Out of California's Emerald Triangle

Here. Interesting. A gang of young men tried to raid a marijuana garden in the Emerald Triangle of California last year. They were met by other young men defending their crop. Some of the raiders were taken prisoner. The raiders attacked with sticks and chunks of concrete to try to free their prisoners. All prisoners escaped but one, who was badly beaten with sticks and was in a coma. Police arrived, took the beaten man to the hospital where he soon came out of his coma. The people who assaulted him were not arrested! The police decided that the many marijuana plants were “in violation of local ordinances” and confiscated them. None of the growers were arrested! Wow. Only in California, eh? The comments below are interesting. The Triangle is experiencing its worst spell of ripoffs since 1979. Thefts go down all the time, and everyone is paranoid. Much of the growing is sadly now being done by Organized Crime gangs. Reading between the lines, the Organized Crime growing in the region appears to be Nuestra Familia (locally Nortenos) and La Eme (The Mexican Mafia or Surenos). Nuestra Familia and the Mexican Mafia are the real hardcores, and the Surenos and Nortenos are mostly just the local sets on the streets. Sort of like the Mafia and little local Italian street gangs loosely associated with them. Apparently most of the grows are being done by Nuestra Familia, since this is Northern California after all. Grows are as large as 100,000 plants. These large grows are widely resented as sucking streams dry, mix fertilizer in the bottoms of wells and bury their trash in holes in the ground. It looks like cops only get a very small amount of the crop. A friend of mine used to grow up there in the mid 1980’s, around 1984-1985. He worked construction about 1/2 the year and made a bundle back when unionized White construction workers could make excellent money. The other half of the year he was up in the Triangle growing marijuana. There were three guys in on the grow, and I think they made $150,000 between them, or $50,000 apiece. Pretty nice for 6 months work. He did it for a few years and never got caught. He would bring it back down to Orange County and sell it. Even back then, this was very strong pot – skunk, sinsemilla, whatever you want to call it. It went for ~$2000-2400 a pound and the price per ounce was pretty high too. I have no idea how that compares to prices nowadays. He said that the main problems were deer and spider mites. Spider mites are tiny insects that infest the undersides of the leaves of marijuana and other plants. I’ve seen them before. The deer are mostly a problem in the fall when most of the vegetation has dried up but of course the pot plants are still very green, so the deer just hone right in on them. He said busts were a worry also around harvest time for the same reason. Everything is brown and dry but the pot, which is still bright green and can be spotted from the air by helicopters. He said that you can’t really walk around out there. He said “everyone is growing,” it’s all private property, fenced in various ways, and no one dares trespass on anyone else’s property. If you do, as soon as you are on anyone’s property for 5-10 minutes, people will be right there onto you asking you what you are doing. Back then, people regularly got short prison terms up there for growing pot, but in recent years, I understand that law enforcement is having a hard time finding juries willing to convict. In up 8 I have been in and around this region exploring extensively once. I went to Cloverdale, Ukiah and Dos Rios. I fished in the Russian River and Eel River. I caught a Steelie looking trout in the Russian River and another trout in the Eel. While fishing the Eel, a water snake took off across the river right next to where I was fishing – an Aquatic Garter Snake. There was a large bird making a huge racket across the river the whole time I was there. I finally figured out that I was fishing across the river from an Osprey’s nest and the bird was trying to tell me to get away from its nest. I was there in the Spring, and there was water everywhere. It’s basically a gigantic forest and there is a stream or rivulet pouring down off the slope every few hundred yards or so, with many much larger streams and even rivers, mostly unnamed, pouring down at less frequent intervals. It’s a mountain forest that’s basically leaking water like a full sponge. There are hippie looking mountain man characters roaming around all over the place. If you ever get a chance, you might want to go check this area out.

"Cheating, Snooping, and Felonious Conduct," by Alpha Unit

A horrible crime has occurred in the state of Michigan. You may have heard by now. But the people of Michigan need not fear: a prosecutorial posse is pursuing this criminal with vigor. A 33-year-old man who suspected his wife of cheating got into her e-mail account, using a password that he says she kept in a book next to the computer. A computer that the couple shared. Leon Walker says he had no choice but to snoop in his wife’s account. He cites concern for the couple’s child, whom he didn’t want around the man he suspected of being her lover. His suspicions were confirmed, apparently. The couple’s subsequent divorce became final this month. But the state of Michigan isn’t done with Walker. He’s been charged with unauthorized access to a computer in order to “acquire, alter, damage, delete, or destroy property.” The law is typically used to prosecute people for identity theft or for stealing trade secrets. Walker could possibly serve five years in prison. At question is whether a spouse can expect privacy on a jointly owned computer. Walker’s attorney says no. Furthermore, he says:

If there’s going to be a concerted effort in the future to prosecute everybody who looks at somebody else’s e-mail under their roof, they had better build a bunch more courthouses because we don’t have enough courthouses.

I’ve heard some people raise the question: if a wife had gotten into her husband’s e-mail account and confirmed that he was cheating, would the state be going after her? Probably, if someone thought an example should be made of her, I’m guessing. That’s what seems to be happening here. Mrs. Walker filed a complaint about her husband’s actions, according to the prosecutor. If a man were similarly caught, would he complain about his wife getting a hold of his e-mails? Or would he do as expected and “take it like a man”?

The Real Reason for the Shining Path

Repost from the old site. Rightwing anti-Communists (and for that matter, Centrist and liberal US anti-Communists also) have some very peculiar attitudes about Communism, shaped by the Cold War. Communism, it appears, is some strange, evil and insane system, a crazy, idiotic and totally failed economic and social system that brought nothing but misery, hunger, starvation and poverty to the world, while bringing nothing good. The alternative was capitalism, which would at some point conquer hunger, poverty, starvation and all that. Capitalism is always supposed to conquer these things at some point in the future. Capitalist polemicists usually say, “Just give it some time…” With the neoliberalism that has been pushed since 1980 and has brought nothing but misery and impoverishment to billions and caused many millions of deaths, we have always been told that it would start working pretty soon now…maybe next year…victory is right around the corner. The truth is that after 25 years of neoliberalism, the verdict is in and a long report has documented it quite well. Nearly everywhere it has been tried, neoliberalism has benefited the top 2 Even in the US, from 1980-1992, the top 2 Neoliberalism, nearly everywhere, resulted in lowered economic growth rates, massive debt, plunging wages and living standards for the majority, reductions in access to health and eduction, and reductions in many health and education metrics like infant mortality, life expectancy and the percentage of children in school at various ages. This is because neo-liberalism mandated massive cuts in all social services, especially education and health care. The outcome was foretold. The truth about neoliberalism is that it has always been a scam in which the West, especially Western banks, corporations and investors, ripped off the rest of the World blind and the people were always left holding the bag. Nevertheless, the ripoff artists keep trying to sell their neoliberal snake oil around the world, but more and more nations are no longer buying. Most of the countries of Latin America have tired of the “checks in the mail” neoliberal snipe hunt, and collectively, they are trying, in their own often-limited ways, to dislodge themselves from the grip of the neoliberal plague. Even mainstream economists admit that Latin America (macroeconomically) did not benefit from the neoliberal fad. Recently, Argentina paid off its foreign debt and said no more. In Venezuela, Chavez is trying to forge a completely new path that is, instead of the Communism his detractors libel him with, in truth nothing more than a reformation of capitalism. President Lula in Brazil has been hampered by the death grip of both investor capital and the markets; he has not been able to do much at all. Uruguay has elected a strident Leftist, but it is not known what he can do given his restraints. Chile, after the utter failure of Pinochet’s radical free market economics (something the free market crazies have never owned up to), has elected a socialist and a woman as President, Bachelet. It is not known what she can do in terms of progress, but Chile still has an education and health sector that is in pretty good shape and sports good metrics to show for it. In Ecuador, Rafael Correa is President, and he has formed an alliance with Chavez. It remains to be seen what he can do in terms of progress, as his options, as usual, are limited. In Bolivia, Evo Morales, an Indian, has won a very close election in a country where a small White elite has always run roughshod over the majority Indian population. His options are also limited, but Morales’ rhetoric has at least been almost as radical as Chavez’. A major problem in Bolivia is the mestizos in the East of the country (Santa Cruz Province) who despise the Indians the West as inferior while they sit on top of Bolivia’s rich natural gas deposits. They are making noises about succession, but they will never try it. In Mexico, AMLO (Lopez-Obrador), a Leftist, actually won the election, but due to the usual fraud, the PAN (a rightwing Catholic party that rose out of the religious hot war in Mexico in the 1920’s that left 70,000 dead) now holds the presidency. Felipe Calderon is the PAN President and he won’t do a damned thing to solve the problems that have caused an incredible 1 As an example of such problems, the family of one man, Carlos Slim, the head of the private Mexican phone monopoly, controls 5 There has been some resistance to this semi-feudal order. A very radical movement has tried to overthrow the corrupt and brutal dictatorial government of Oaxaca state. The Zapatistas* are still alive, and recently a Leftist group, the EPL*, has started to blow stuff up again, after disappearing for three years. In Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega was re-elected, but he appears to have softened his rhetoric to the point where he cannot do much. Still, he has formed an alliance with Chavez. Nicaragua, now the second poorest country in Latin America, lies in corrupt ruins. Support for the considerably neutered Sandinistas is higher than reported in the ruling class media – although Ortega had 3 Under the Sandinistas, Nicaragua went from one of the worst to one of the best in Central America for literacy and health care figures. In 1990, Violeta Chamorro, adored by the whole US political spectrum, including the Cruise Missile liberals of the US Democratic Party, won the election. Right away, she ended free education, requiring students to spend $35 a year on uniforms, a fee that immediately threw large numbers of kids out of school. Most have yet to return. She also got rid of free health care, so most of the population is without health care again. The health and education figures for the nation have shown the expected collapse. It is interesting that Democratic Party liberals are apparently overjoyed about this situation, showing the bankruptcy of their ideology. Most of the rest of the continent is collapsed in the usual ruins. 1 million people die every year from hunger in Latin America, and this has been going on for decades. How come this stuff never makes it to the “Worst Killers in Recent History” contests? The anti-Communist line about Communism divorces it from its concrete realities in the sort of totally rotten social and economic systems that have spawned peasant revolutions for centuries before Karl Marx was even born. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990’s and the fall of the Warsaw Pact, rightwingers rejoiced. It was the “end of history”, said Francis Fukuyama. The era of peasant revolts was over. Never again would humanity have to worry about any Marxist, Leftist, worker, peasant, or even populist revolution. Capitalism was here to say, in all of its forms, from most enlightened to most hideous, and no one could do a damn thing about it! Well, that is nonsense. Anti-Communists say that revolutions happen for no reason at all, other than the insane desire of Communist madmen to seize power and impose their failed system on an unwilling population. They say that revolutions do not arise from horrible social and economic systems – they arise from sick Marxist pathology. Get rid of Marxism, they say, and capitalism can run wild on humanity again. Perhaps we can even re-instate feudalism and slavery while we are at it. After all, they were both great for business. Amidst the deafening racket of nonsense, a series of economic figures looms up at us like a ghost from the recent Peruvian past. In back of those figures, 15 years later in 1980, like an Inca God rising up from the grave to slay the Spanish invaders 450 years after they waded ashore, is the frightening shadow of the Peruvian Shining Path*, another “totally insane” Marxist group that arose “for no reason whatsoever other than sheer evil”. Yet the figures below show us why a revolution, even one as insane as Sendero Luminoso, was inevitable: From the Peruvian National Planning Institute in Bejar, Peru, in 1965, we learn that the 24,000 families of the White ruling class in Lima had an income of $62,000/yr*. The entire rest of the country had an average family income of $157. The Indians of the Sierra, who even now have a life expectancy of only 45 years, had an average family income of only $10 a year. *All figures in 1965 US dollars. Most people agree that things have only gotten worse in Peru since then. Look at those figures above and tell that that is not kindling and kerosene for bloody revolution. The match was called Sendero, and someone was going to toss a match sooner or later. There were centuries in Peru before 1965, four of them, and they build on our tale. From 1526 (when the Spaniards came to Peru) to 1630, the Indian population declined from 13 million to 600,000 – a loss of 9 For the next three centuries, the Indians were tied to the land like serfs, bonded in debt peonage in a feudal estate society. This continued until well into the 1970’s. The jungle Indians were enslaved and killed for sport starting in the 1800’s and continuing until 50 years or so ago. It is 1980. The bump and lurch of the dialectic, from Hegel to Marx to This is an example, from the city of Cherboksary, Russia, of the most failed economic system ever known to mankind – Communism. The fountains you see are inferior and worthless – totally failed fountains, if you will. The buildings in the background as are complete failures as buildings, since they are dull and boring. Those buildings are called “socialist housing” and everyone in the West agrees that this type of housing does not work. What works much better are the capitalist slums in the pictures to follow. The river is quite clean and this is another example of complete failure. Much better are the black rivers of capitalist slums, stinking with garbage, animal corpses and raw sewage. Why? Because diseases and smells are exciting! Who wants to be bored, anyway? Even the bright greenery in the foreground in a total failure – it’s much better to have live amidst the mounds of garbage you see below. Capitalist slums, with their thrill a minute and constant search for food, are the only way to go. A slum in Brazil. This is the successful system that works. Much better than that failed, dull socialist housing above, no? When are you moving in, reader? Men pick through a garbage dump, probably in Nairobi. Slums in Nairobi make up Slums of Nairobi. This is the only viable system on Earth, capitalism. All of the alternatives, especially Communism, are failed and don’t work. As you can see, this system works great. Communist housing fails because it is dull, boring and lifeless. It is much better to live in lively, exciting surroundings like this Nairobi slum, where I assure you there is never a dull movement. How dare those evil Commies try to move these people into “failed” Soviet-style high-rises! An excellent example of capitalist education from Africa. Capitalism hates education, everywhere and at all times, because the capitalists can’t make any money off of it, and the capitalists all send their kids to fancy private schools, hence they resent paying for a system they do not even use. So capitalism, under neoliberalism, has predictably devastated education systems around the Third World. Who needs to get educated anyway? The problem of the 3rd World is too many kids! Besides, Black people are so dumb that all attempts to educate them are a waste of time, or so The Bell Curve told me. Slums of Brazil. The problem is these Brazilians have too damn many kids! Yet the evidence shows that Brazil’s birthrate is actually below replacement level. Never matter, in that case, the poor should quit having babies altogether! Somehow, Westerners always find a way to blame the victim. Of course, Brazil having the worst rich-poor gap on Earth could not have anything to do with this situation, now would it? By 2020, 4 The charming slums of Brazil. Rio de Janeiro is home to 12 million people – 4 million of them in 800 different favelas, or slums. All of these slums are run by gangs of drug dealers, who engage in continuous battles with each other and the police, that is, when they are not engaging in armed robberies, kidnappings and homicides. Recent articles in the Western press have hailed the dramatic improvements in these slums. As you can see here, they are so much better than they used to be! Residents of a slum in Nairobi trudge through the garbage on their way home. Nairobi has an out of control crime rate, but of course that has nothing to do with the fact that these folks live in slums. It is because the criminals are evil and commit crimes for no reason at all. Furthermore, they are Black, and Black people are genetically natural born criminals. They’re just a race of Bad Seeds, and nothing can be done about them at all. The wonderful slums of Mumbai again! This is the high tech economy that is taking the world by storm, the envy of the planet. Check out that high tech dishwasher this girl is using – I bet it was designed by those IT professionals down in Bangalore! Go, India go! The truth about India is, of course, more tragic than Tom Friedman (see below) can figure out. By 1985, capitalism was killing between between 2.92 and 4 million every year in India, and 1.76 million were being killed in Bangladesh. That is 5.25 million people being killed by capitalism every year in just those two countries alone. But wait a minute! Capitalism doesn’t kill anyone. Stalin and Mao were the worst killers of the 20th century, dontcha know? Since Communism doesn’t work, we have to go with the only alternative, the system that works, capitalism. This photo shows you just how great it works in Mumbai, India. Noam Chomsky reports that, comparing China and India, which had similar developmental figures in 1949, there have been 100 million excess deaths in Indian from 1947-1979. This clearly shows the superiority of Chinese Communism, at least when it comes to saving lives. Note that China’s superior figures even include all of those killed by Maoism, which may number over 20 million people. But Maoism saved far more, and China set a world record with the fastest doubling of life expectancy by any country, going from 32 in 1949 to 65 in 1976, surpassing Joseph Stalin’s record set in 1956. Now in China, gone heavily over to capitalism, millions are dying from lack of health care alone. Getting back to India, recent figures show that there are 4 million excess deaths in India every single year. Gideon Polya calculates that excess infant mortality alone, compared to a model of Sri Lanka, kills 2.7 million Indians per year. Slums of Mumbai. 6 million people – 6 Working backwards and forwards from Chomsky’s figures above of 4 million deaths per year in India from capitalism, which he got from Indian economist Amratya Sen, we can guess that capitalism may have killed 170 million Indians since 1949 as compared to the Chinese model. But wait, aren’t Communists the worst killers of them all? Don’t like the way I do figures? Try these instead then. Capitalism kills 14 million people every single year just by starvation, mostly in South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan).

*This blog does not support the project of Sendero Luminoso, as they kill people who are completely innocent. It does support the Zapatistas and the EPL in Mexico.

Older Men's Holiday Scam – Beware!

Women often receive warnings about protecting themselves at the mall and in dark parking lots, etc. This is the first warning I have seen for men. I wanted to pass it on in case you haven’t heard about it. A ‘heads up’ for those men who may be regular customers at Lowe’s, Home Depot, Costco, or even Wal-Mart. This one caught me totally by surprise. Over the last month I became a victim of a clever scam while out shopping. Simply going out to get supplies has turned out to be quite traumatic. Don’t be naive enough to think it couldn’t happen to you or your friends. Here’s how the scam works: Two nice-looking, college-aged girls will come over to your car or truck as you are packing your purchases into your vehicle. They both start wiping your windshield with a rag and Windex, with their breasts almost falling out of their skimpy T-shirts. (It’s impossible not to look). When you thank them and offer them a tip, they say ‘No’ but instead ask for a ride to McDonald’s. You agree and they climb into the vehicle. On the way, they start undressing. Then one of them starts crawling all over you, while the other one steals your wallet. I had my wallet stolen October 4th, 9th, 10th, twice on the 15th, 17th, 20th, 24th, & 29th. Also November 1st & 4th, twice on the 8th, 16th, 23rd, 26th & 27th, and very likely again this upcoming weekend. So tell your friends to be careful. What a horrible way to take advantage of us older men. Warn your friends to be vigilant! Wal-Mart has wallets on sale for $2.99 each. I found even cheaper ones for $.99 at the dollar store and bought them out in three of their stores. Also, you never get to eat at McDonald’s. I’ve already lost 11 pounds just running back and forth from Lowe’s to Home Depot to Costco, etc. So please, send this on to all the older men that you know and warn them to be on the lookout for this scam. P.S. The best times are just before lunch and around 4:30 in the afternoon.

Suicide Club Strangler

Weird story of the day. (Link NSFW). There are suicide clubs all over Japan. Idiots who want to kill themselves but don’t have the guts form clubs to meet up with other suicidals. They talk about their favorite subject for a while, then meet up and get up the nerve to kill themselves. Finally, they do it, often as a group effort. Of course clubs like this could only attract a serial killer! Haha! Serial killer infiltrates suicide clubs, meets up with suicidals, pretends he wants to kill himself too, then uses the opportunity to strangle the suicidals to death, doing the job for them so to speak. There is a lot of talk about the perpetrator, who was just hanged in Japan. It’s said that he could not get off unless he was strangling someone. They are all talking about how weird this is. It’s an extreme case, but it’s not that weird. The killer is a sexual sadist, as most serial killers are. The condition begins in adolescence. The sexual sadism of all serial killers dates back to the teen years and the beginning of sexuality. Sexual sadism is quite common, especially in the gay male community, where maybe 15-2 Sexual pain is not a requirement for masochists either. They just like it that way. This thing is quite common among females, and I keep running into female masochists of various types for some reason, though I’m not wild about fulfilling their fantasies. A lot of them don’t want pain so much as playing an extremely submissive role. Most sexual sadists of both sexes (yes there are dominatrix type women out there) go through their lives without harming a soul. In severe cases, that’s another matter. A typical severe case is a gay man who is engaging in S/M sex with gay masochists. He urinates on them, beats them, abuses them, etc. Then he starts escalating, and he’s burning them with cigarettes. As he’s doing this, he gets an extreme rush and urge to go even further and maybe even kill them, but he catches himself. He shows up in therapy feeling like he’s out of control, like a gambling addict. He loves to inflict pain, but he worries he’s going to go out of control and seriously hurt or even kill someone. It’s quite common for male serial killers to have strange sex with girlfriends. Often they like to pretend to strangle the girlfriend during sex. In extreme cases, this is the only way they can get off. All these guys have been this way since the teen years, and it’s not something you can catch against your will like the flu. They love it this way. It is when the consensual sex starts escalating like this that he’s typically either already killing or beginning to kill. A serial killer cannot be treated, as he doesn’t think he has a problem. Consequently, of course they feel no guilt. Nor can the sexual sadism be treated. He loves it like this. It’s not an obsession. He doesn’t try to stop thinking this way, and it doesn’t bother him. These guys commonly are fantasizing all the time, all day and all night. When they are out in public, they are always dreaming. Every nice woman they see, they dream about raping and killing her. How will they do it? How will they get away with it? On and on. Dream, dream, dream, all day, everywhere they go. They simply don’t care.

Julian Assange, Date Rapist

Here. The guy is an absolute, complete, total fool. With all the intelligence agencies in the world after him, he date rapes two women in two days. Let’s get this straight. Date rape happens all the time. A female friend of mine, age 19, was recently date raped. She passed out drunk, and he was having sex with her while she was unconscious. Her vagina was dry too – because she was unconscious, so there was pain and minor bleeding. She really doesn’t have a case, as the last thing she remembers was she was on her knees giving him head in a bedroom. Apparently afterwards she passed out, but she was technically a virgin, and she would not have consented to intercourse. She passed out at some point. She was on the bed, passed out and dry, and the guy had sex with her, necrophiliac-like. She woke up and pushed him off her. She lost her virginity in a case of date rape, and she had not wanted to lose her virginity that way. For months afterward, she was angry, and she could not figure why. I think it’s clear why she was so angry. I felt very sorry for this woman. This stuff happens all the time in the US. It’s one form of rape that is quite common even among Whites, who have a lower rape rate than Blacks or Hispanics. I think Blacks and Hispanics do tons of date rape too, but it’s probably regarded as almost normal in those cultures. My point is that Whites don’t shy away from this stuff, mostly because a lot of White guys think “it’s not rape.” Assange ended up at the home of Woman A, at her place after dinner. She had invited him to stay there. A makeout session got aggressive and Assange started tearing off her clothes. He ripped a necklace off her neck, possibly breaking it in the process. She tried to halt the whole mess, as things were just going too far, but then decided to give in. They ended up in the bedroom. He insisted on not using a condom, and she said no condom, no sex buddy. He then produced a condom, which happened to be torn. It looks like he may have torn it himself. She still said no sex. At that point he pinned her down to the bed, holding her down as he had sex with her. Date rape all the way. After that, she had had enough, but she still let him stay there, though he had to sleep in the living room. She said after, “Not only was it the worst sex I’ve ever had, but it was violent.” He repeatedly tried to have sex with her every day he stayed there after that, and she turned him down every time. One time, bottomless, he pressed himself against her, and she pushed him away. Finally, she told him to leave. Two days later, he was over at Woman B’s place. He had sex with her with a condom, and then they both went to sleep. She insisted no condom, no sex. She woke up in the morning to discover him having sex with her without a condom. She said, “You better not have HIV!” He said he didn’t and finished his business. She insisted that he get STD testing, but he refused. She got a morning after pill because she was afraid of pregnancy and got STD testing. She happened to run into Woman A and recounted her story to Woman A. She discovered that Woman A had been date raped too. They both went to the police to talk to them about what happened. Later, both women decided that they did not wish to press charges. That should have ended it right there, but after that, it was nothing but political BS. The Swedes issued all APB for the guy via Interpol, he was arrested and charges are still being figured out. The charges are complete nonsense, as the women refuse to cooperate with police. Therefore, they need to be dropped. The women were not working for intelligence agencies and there was no honey trap. Julian Assange is a date rapist and a first class prick. Not only that, but he’s a reckless moron. With every other intelligence agency on Earth after him, he acts this recklessly. Idiot.

Are White Communities Crime Free?

The Black rejoinder to reports of differential crime rates is, “Whites commit crime too,” and “White communities have crime too.” Well, no shit Sherlock. Chances are, if you live all your life in a White community, sooner of later you will get ripped off. I would say it’s almost a sure thing. But it’s once in a blue moon, and it often follows certain standards. First, ripoffs are burglary or larceny types. They happen when you’re not there. If your house gets ripped, it’s when you weren’t home. They won’t take everything. They often will only take one thing. I’m convinced that White thieves actually tend to be higher class than non-White thieves. For instance, my Mom left her purse in a shopping cart at a supermarket in a White town. When she went back, it was gone. She freaked out bad for a few days. Her license and credit cards and everything else were in there. About three days later, someone threw the purse on her driveway in the middle of the night. She found it the next morning. Everything was still there, but the small amount of money ($40) was gone. I was told that this happens a lot in White communities. Lose your wallet or purse, and it often turns up on your driveway or porch a few days later, minus the money. The criminals actually look up your address, drive to your house in the middle of the night and return your belongings, but whatever cash is in there is gone. It makes sense. If you rip a billfold, all you want is the cash. Get rid of the rest of it. It’s a bust. Loss of license and credit cards is a severe hardship to the victim, and it’s like the White thief knows this and feels bad. I seriously doubt that a non-White thief who stole your purse or wallet would track down your address and leave your belongings on your doorstep absent the money. They’d either throw it by the side of the road or in the trash, or they’d keep the credit cards and try to use them. Sure there’s crime, especially theft, in White places. But there’s not that much. If you’ve lived in White and non-White towns, you notice the crime difference often immediately. I think crime figures are artificially high in White towns and artificially low in non-White towns. In non-White towns, petty theft is a police nuisance. They won’t even send an officer out to take a report. You get an annoyed cop who says, “We get theft reports all day here!” They send you a police report in the mail, if you can believe that. I still haven’t filled mine out. I’m sure most petty crime is not even formally reported. In a White town, when we got burglarized, the cops came out, took fingerprints, the whole nine yards. A petty theft report may well be the highlight of a bored cop’s day.

Differential Morality Among Races: Possible Reasons

Why do people bring up differential crime rates? Often, it’s simply to bash Blacks. That’s certainly not my intention here. After all, I’m a race realist. I’m not even certain that Blacks and Hispanics can be blamed for their higher crime rates. If the high crime isn’t their fault, how can you blame someone for something that isn’t his fault? They seem to like living in their communities just fine. If they are happy there, who am I to attack them? I have several reasons to point this out.

  1. What is it that Whites like about their White communities that makes them want to live there, and what is it Whites don’t like about Black and Hispanic communities that makes Whites not want to live in those places?
  2. Why do Whites pay a high premium to live in White communities with “good schools” = White schools?
  3. Although in general, I can’t stand the superior races – inferior races argument, and I blanch and wince when someone says Whites are superior or some non-White group are inferior, I will hold fast on one view. I absolutely feel that Whites are as a group morally superior to Blacks and Hispanics. I’m not going to answer the superior-inferior question on any other variable. And I don’t have to prove it. I lived 53 years on Earth. That’s all the proof I need. I’m also not going to argue about whether this moral issue is genetic or cultural. Who cares? They’re morally lower, and that’s that. Why is it important to know why?

What are the reasons that Whites are morally superior, and we are by the way? 1. Socioeconomics: This is a tough one, but many Blacks and Hispanics have evolved into a more or less permanent Underclasses. They don’t have much money. Not only that, but they don’t see much way up or out of that. Even poor Whites often think they are going to get rich, or at least if you’re White, you can’t really be Underclass. Poor Whites don’t feel like members of a shut out Underclass. Underclass non-White poverty gives rise to feeling of vengeance, of wanting to rip off those that have. If I have two jackets in my car, I only need one, so why not steal the other one? I’m convinced that a lot of Black and Hispanic crime is ripping off the “haves” who are seen as having unjust wealth. Private property is sacrosanct in White society. You don’t mess with a man’s stuff. I’ve known White thieves. First of all, they all had a code. There were two types of people: the people you hang out with and their friends, who you did not rip off, and everyone else, who could be ripped off. The White thieves I knew were not out to steal from the rich. They just stole from any “outsider.” Blacks and Hispanics don’t seem to have this code. 2. The socio in socioeconomics. Underclass ghettos and barrios are basically nothing more than gigantic crime factories. If you come out of a neighborhood like that and you’re not a criminal, you deserve a medal. Most White population centers are not crime factories for whatever reason. 3. White values. If I had a nickel for every time I heard a White person say, “I wasn’t brought up that way,” or “I was brought up that you never do that,” I’d be a rich man. Whites are not necessarily following external morality. They won’t necessarily do whatever they can get away with. They often have an internal morality drummed into them from Day One. White society seriously ostracizes bad actors. Thieves are shunned and condemned. Even 10-15 years later, if you had an old reputation for being a thief, a lot of folks still won’t trust you. You will practically have to get down on your knees and kiss feet to win back their trust. White society has an attitude, “Once a criminal, always a criminal.” Criminals, especially thieves with prison records, are considered to be never rehabilitated. A person like that is never to be trusted again, because people don’t change. If you give people the benefit of the doubt, you’re regarded as an idiot who’s asking to get burned. Whiteness is highly prized in White society, and it can be revoked at any time. It’s not true that only Blacks are called niggers. When a White person seriously sleazes out, especially into victimizing crime, jail, prison, or just generally low class behavior, he’s regarded as “niggerish” = wigger. Such Whites have their Whiteness revoked and they may as well dread their hair, paint their face and move to Detroit. Say I’m having a fight with a White guy. He says “Screw you,” I say, “Screw you,” back, and we both walk away. The general attitude is we won’t speak again. Later on, we may try to patch it up, since White society doesn’t like endless simmering feuds between men. Now, if I’m really furious, I could go rip him off to get back at him. But no way would I do that. To go over to his place and steal his property is “niggerish” – it’s a low, dirty, scummy, slimy, slug-like thing to do. I’m doing what non-Whites do. As a White man, I’m a member of the most exalted race on Earth, and I can’t degrade myself that way. I shame myself, my family, my ancestors, and I even shame my great White race. There is an attitude of “I don’t stoop that low.” I’ve noticed that a lot of non-Whites will steal from you if you make them mad. I guess they use that as an excuse to rip you off? There’s also an attitude of “a bridge too far.” As I said, I used to run with dopers and dealers. White pot dealer society at the time was actually pretty high class society, with its own code. Mainly, you did not rip people off. If you did, your name was mud, and there could be consequences. Mostly, you would be run out of the whole dealer culture, lose all your customers, suppliers and most of your friends. I don’t rip you off, you don’t rip me off. That’s the code, and everyone has to abide. Also, people have plenty of dirty information. Suppose I rip someone off. Other dealers are not angels. They are well known to cooperate with police. I reported several dealers to police for violating “the code.” If I rip someone off, all it takes a phone call to the narcotics desk, and the cops are onto me. Also, if I’m a ripoff, there are consequences. I can get my ass kicked. Ass kickings happen a lot in White World, and the cops often don’t care if you’re a scumbag who got what’s coming. More importantly, dealer society took care of ripoffs in various ways. One way was that the person’s property would be vandalized, often seriously. We are talking 100’s to 1000’s of dollars. On the other hand, you can’t kill someone over a ripoff. There’s an attitude in White society that you don’t kill someone over property loss. If a dealer got burned, he and his buddies who go destroy the ripoff’s property. But if someone said to kill him, he would be shouted down. That would be considered “a bridge too far.” Not only does no one want to go down on homicide, there’s also the attitude that you don’t kill a man over property loss. You only kill to defend life, not property. I’ve noticed that non-Whites kill all the time over property loss. Ripoffs and burns seem to be the cause of a lot of homicide in ghettos and barrios. We don’t understand this; it’s very alien to us. That the races have different morals should be obvious for anyone to see. Remember in the 1960’s-1980’s, there were a lot of White rock stars who were given to some pretty wild and insane behavior? They were considered outlaws. But did you ever hear of Led Zeppelin putting out a hit on Black Sabbath? Did Paul McCartney try to murder Mick Jagger? Of course not. That’s simply not done. Yet this is what Blacks do. Rap stars, even with multimillion dollar records, mansions, Rolls Royces and all the money a man could want, routinely grab guns and murder their rival music stars. We can’t comprehend that. People who do that are like people from another planet. As I said, it’s like Robert Plant shooting Ozzy Osborne. Unthinkable. I’ve been told that even biker society has an extremely complex code of ethics. You don’t lie or steal from your buddies, and you’re a man of your word. Sure, those guys are outside the law, but within their little group, there is a strict code, and if you fuck up, there’s Hell to pay. This even applies to nonverbal behavior, for which there is a rulebook so complex that it boggles my mind.

Why Rank Ethnic Groups According to Propensity to Crime?

Some people say that ranking ethnic groups according to propensity to crime or bad behavior is ridiculous. They ask, “What’s it all about?” Why rank groups by their propensity for theft or rape. What’s it all about? 1. Knowing who to more or less trust. 2. Knowing where to live and who to hang out with. 3. Knowing who to be wary around and not trust until proven trustworthy. 4. For a woman, knowing which men to trust more than other men and knowing which men to be particularly wary about. Life is an odds game. You play the odds. You figure which groups you have better or worse experience with and then proceed to trust or be wary based on that experience. Sure, it’s discriminatory, but so what? That’s the way people are. We generalize. If you couldn’t generalize, you might be able to get out of bed, but I don’t think you could do much else in the day. We start generalizing when we wake up and continue throughout the day. Other than that, just idle ruminating about the human race and its varieties. I don’t think there’s anything that can be done about Blacks and Hispanics higher propensity for ripoff. I don’t think it will ever change and I don’t know if they can help it. Some will say that humans will do just about anything they get away with, including stealing. So Whites will steal just as much as anyone else if they think they can get away with it. White people will not do whatever they can get away with, not really. A lot of them have internal morality to uphold. “This is the way I was raised. I was raised that you never do that, ever. I was raised that you always pay back, etc.” They could easily scum out like everyone else but there is an internal morality barometer that they are obeying.

Thieving House Guests and Gibs Me Dat

Here are two examples of how some minority communities operate at a lower moral level than White communities: First example: Thieving house guests! I made some friends with some idiots who live around my apartment complex. The complex is mostly Hispanics, some Blacks, and a few Whites. Eventually, they got invited into my house. Once inside, a number of them, I believe six so far, stole from me. The loot ranged from a $175 knife to $240 to a bag of potato chips. They also drew graffiti on my TV stand with a pen and drew graffiti on other objects with pencil. Some stole after they had been in the place scores or possibly hundreds of times. I thought I knew them well. That’s 6 guests who ripped me off in 2 years. 5 of them were Hispanics, and 1 was half Hispanic, half Black. The part Black one is worst of all by orders of magnitude. Draw your own conclusions. You may offer a variety of justifications for this. As a counterexample, I lived in White communities all my life. Let’s take the period from age 18 on, since there were a few ripoffs as a kid, one by invited guests aged 11 years old. I also lived a street kind of life for a good part of that period and sold drugs out of my house for over a decade. Mostly pot, but also some psychedelics. So I had White dopers in my place all the time. In that time, I had 100’s of possibly 1000’s of people over at my place. I’m a hermit now, but back then it was typical to go to up to 6 different parties in a night. I also threw wild parties with 100’s of people in the yard and house, live band in the living room, kegs of beer in the back, half the people high on LSD, the party repeatedly broken up, often violently, by police. Think what you will about that lifestyle, but that was simply the way that I lived. In all that time, I think one guest invited into my home ripped me off. A family member was in a delinquent phase, so I had White delinquent types over all the time as his guests. One time I had some pills in the bathroom, stolen from a pharmacy by a friend who worked as a pharmacy worker. These pills were extremely popular even with very middle class and upper middle class White types and I did a thriving business. I went to the bathroom, got out some pills, showed them to the 18 year old punk friends of my family member. One guy looked at me like, “You idiot! You just showed me where you keep your stash!” This was the blond 18 yr old punk who later stole the pills. From age 18-50, 32 years living in White towns and cities, I was ripped off once by a guest, an 18 year old doper delinquent. What’s amazing is I had many White delinquents over to my place and they hardly ripped me off either. I also had many White dealers and dopers over at my place, and hardly a single one of them ripped me off! I believe we suffered little to no theft even at the parties. In White communities, even the house partiers, dopers, dealers and delinquents are higher class – much higher class. Second example: Gibs me dat! There is a Black woman who lives near me. She’s already ripped me off for $25 she borrowed with a weeping sob story. She has flat out told me that I will never be paid back, and that’s that. She was very aggressive about refusing to pay the debt, which she now says she already paid back, and she’s indignant that I want my money back. I’m a scum because I have some morals! She just bought a new car. She has the money. However, incredibly, she still insists on being my friend. I’m a horrible person because I tell her to buzz off until she pays me back. This is the way everyone is around here. They always want loans, but in general, any money loaned out is gone forever. Everyone expects the ripoff to be blown off, and everyone expects you will still be their friend after they rip you off. You’re a freak if you have some standards. Now, in the 32 years I lived in White communities, I think two guys ripped me off. Recall I was a dealer. One was a coke addict and burned me for a $65 bag. He burned everyone else too, but we put a bomb on his windshield and blew it and went into his garage, lifted his car up and turned it upside down so it was resting on its roof! We also slashed all his tires and we made a bunch of prank phone calls to his parents house. Anyway, after this guy ripped me off, he ended the friendship. This is how it works in White World. That you would rip someone off and then continue to try to be friends with them is unfathomable. The other guy also ripped me for a $65 bag but was some victim of circumstances that I don’t recall. I believe the pot was stolen from him or taken by police. Anyway, I never got it back. He was apologetic, but the money was never coming back. I was always leery of associating with him after that, but everyone else did. You rip me off, you don’t come back until you pay up! This Black woman also walks into my home and immediately starts being very aggressive, but also pretends at the same time to be best friends. She walks through the room and starts demanding things. Gibs me dat. Give me this, give me that. Points to things on the wall, food, etc. Give me this, give me that. She also demands a drink right away. She walks over to the radio and turns it off if she doesn’t like the station. I am thinking of all of the thousands of people I had in my homes in White World, and I can’t think of a single White person who had this aggressive attitude of gibs me dat, turning the radio channel, demanding a drink. Not even a single one. There was one that came close, but even he didn’t go nearly this far. He was widely disdained as a “wigger” by everyone who knew him. These are very minor things, but they exemplify the general degradation in the quality of life that occurs when you have large numbers of Blacks and Mexicans. Compared to White communities, Black and Mexican groups simply operate on a lower level of morality that is unbelievably offensive to a White person socialized with White values. It’s enough to make you livid with rage and pound your fists into the table.

Great News!

Now at least we don’t have to prosecute the scumbag. The only reason his Dad went to prison at all is because Bernie Boy stole from the rich, and rich Jews at that. You might be able to steal from rich people in the US, but the Hell you can steal from rich Jews. We know who runs this country. Bernie messed up by not stealing from the poor like all other rich Americans do. If he would have stolen from the poor instead of the rich, Madoff could have had a Cabinet position now if he wanted it.

"Latin America’s Twenty First Century Capitalism and the US Empire," by Dr. James Petras

An excellent analysis of the current scene in Latin America by Marxist James Petras. We often wonder what exactly is going on here or there in the world. For the answer in Latin America, Petras answers a number of important questions. What’s amazing is I can’t find one single area in which he’s wrong in his analysis below. Hence, this analysis is immaculate. If any of you can find anywhere below where he is wrong, let us know. A good tutorial on the Latin American politico-economic scene. Warning: Runs 45 pages.

Political Power and the World Market

The twin nemesis of Latin America’s quest for more equitable and dynamic development, US imperial and local oligarchic power have been subject to profound changes over the past decade. New capitalist classes both at home and abroad have redefined Latin America’s relation to world markets, seized opportunities to stimulate growth and forged cross class coalitions linking overseas investors, agro-mineral exporters, national industrialists with a broad array of trade unions, and in some countries peasant and Indian social movements. Parallel to these changes in Latin America, a new militarist and financial political configuration engaged in prolonged wars, colonial occupations and widespread speculation has weakened the structural economic links – dominance – between US imperial economic interests and Latin America’s dynamic socio-economic classes. In the present conjuncture, these basic changes in the respective class structures – in the US and Latin America – define the contours, constraints and ‘reach’ of the imperial classes as well as the potential autonomy of action of Latin America’s leading socio-economic classes. Notions which freeze Latin America in a time warp such as “500 years of exploitation” or which conflate earlier decades of US political-economic dominance with the present, have failed to take account of recent class dynamics, including popular insurrections, mass electoral mobilizations and failed imperial-centered economic models which have redefined the power equation between the US and Latin America. Equally important, fundamental changes in market relations and market competition has lessened US influence in the world market and opened major growth opportunities for new and established sectors of Latin America’s capitalist class, especially its dynamic export sectors. Understanding imperialism, especially the US variant, requires focusing on class relations, within and between countries and regions, the changing balance of power as well as the impact of fundamental changes in world market relations. Equally important the private economic institutions of imperialism (banks, multi-national corporations, investors) are contingent on the composition and policies of the imperial state. Insofar as the state defines its priorities in military and ideological terms and acts accordingly, by channeling resources in prolonged wars, the imperial policymakers weakens their capacity to sustain, finance and promote overseas private economic interests. As we shall analyze and discuss in the following sections, the US has suffered a relative loss of political and economic power over key Latin American regimes and markets as its military commitments have widened and deepened over time. The result is a Latin American political configuration which has changed dramatically over the past two decades.

Latin American Political-Economic Configurations and US Imperialism

The upsurge of social movements, the subsequent ascent of center-left political regimes,the dynamic economic growth of Asian economies and the consequent sharp increase in prices of commodities in the world market has changed the configuration of political power in Latin America and between the latter and the US between 2000-2010. While the US exercised almost absolute hegemony during the period 1980-1999, the rise of a militarist caste promoting prolonged imperial wars in the Middle East and South Asia and the rise of relatively independent national-popular and social-liberal regimes in Latin America has produced a broad spectrum of governments with greater autonomy of action. Depending on the criteria we use, Latin American countries have moved beyond the orbit of US hegemony. For example, if we examine trade and investment, all the major countries, independent of ideology, have to a greater or lesser degree diversified their markets, trading and investment partners. If we examine political alignments, we find that all the major countries have joined UNASUR, a regional political organization that excludes the US. If we examine policy divergences from the US on major regional issues, such as the US embargo on Cuba, its efforts to isolate Venezuela, its proposed military bases in Colombia, Washington remains in splendid isolation, to the point that the new Colombian President Santos, chooses to “postpone” implementation in favor of maximizing billion dollar trade and diplomatic ties with Venezuela. If we focus on ideological divergence between the US and Latin America, particularly on global issues of free trade, military coups and intervention, we find a variety of positions. For example, Brazil opposes US sanctions against Iran and supports the latter’s program of uranium enrichment for peaceful uses. If we focus on joint US-Latin American military exercises and support for the Haitian occupation, most Latin countries – with the exception of Venezuela – participate. If we examine the issue of bilateral trade and regional trade agreements, the US proposals on the latter were voted down, while several countries pursue (so far with little success) the former. On a rather fluid measure of ‘affinity for neo-liberal’ ideology, in which a mixture of elements of statism, deregulated markets and social welfare co-exist in varying degrees, we can draw up a tentative 4 fold division between “left”, “center left”, “center right” and “right”. On the “left” we can include Venezuela and Bolivia which have expanded the public sector, economic regulations and social spending.   On the “center-left” we can include Argentina, Brazil and Ecuador which have increased social spending, public investment and increased employment, wages and reduced poverty, while vastly increasing private national and foreign investment in agro-mineral export sectors. On the center-right we can include Uruguay, Chile and Paraguay, which embrace free market doctrines, with mild poverty programs and an open door to foreign investment. On the right we find Colombia, Panama, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru, Honduras, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, all of whom line up with Washington on most ideological issues, even as they may be diversifying trade ties with Asia and Venezuela. Internal shifts in class power within Latin America and the US have spurred divergences. Latin America has witnessed greater policy influence by a more ‘globalist elite’ less tied to the US, and an emerging ‘nationalist bourgeoisie’, and greater pressure from reformist working class and public employees trade union. In contrast within the US industrial capital has lost influence to the financial sector and exerts little influence in shaping economic policy toward Latin America, beyond rearguard ‘protectionist’ measures and state subsidies. The US ruling political elite, highly militarized and Zionized, shows little capacity to engage in launching any major new initiatives toward recapturing markets in Latin America, preferring massive military expenditures on wars and paying tribute to their Israeli mentors. As a result of major socio-political shifts within the US and Latin America and the singular importance of dynamic changes in the world market, there are four axis of power operating in the Western Hemisphere. The emerging economic power of Brazil and the growth of intra-regional trade within and between Latin American economies. The dynamic expansion of Asian trade, investment and markets leading to a long term, large scale shift toward greater economic diversification. The substantial financial flows from the US to Latin America in the form of “hot money” with destabilizing effects, as well as continued substantial investment, trade and military ties. The European Union, Russia and the Middle East as real and potential influences in particular settings, depending on the countries and time frame. Of these 4 ‘vectors of power’, the most significant in recent times in reshaping Latin America’s relation to the US and more importantly in opening up prospects for 21st century capitalist growth, is the boom in commodity prices and demand – the dynamic of the world market. On the ‘negative side’, the prolonged US-EU economic crises has limited trade and investment growth and encouraged greater Latin American integration and expansion of regional markets. A serious threat to Latin America’s growth, autonomy and stability is found in the US currency devaluation and subsequent overvaluing of Latin currencies (especially Brazil) imposing constraints on industrial exports and prejudicing the manufacturing sector. Equally important US and EU manipulation of interest rates – downward – has driven speculative capital toward higher interest rates in Latin America, creating destabilizing “bubbles” which can derail the economies.

US Empire Strikes Back: Protectionism, Devaluation and Unilateralism

By the middle of 2010 it was clear that the US economy was losing the competitive battle for markets around the world and was unable to reduce its trade and fiscal deficit within the existing global free trade regime. The Obama regime, led by Federal Reserve head Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Geithner unilaterally launched a thinly disguised trade war, effectively devaluing the dollar and lowering interest rates on bonds in order to increase exports and in effect ‘overvalue’ the currency of their competitors. In other words the Obama regime resorted to a virile “bugger your neighbor policies”, which outraged world economic leaders, provoking Brazilian economic leaders to speak of a “currency war”. Contrary to Washington’s rhetoric of “greater co-operation”, the Obama regime was resorting to protectionist policies designed to alienate the leading economic powers in the region. No longer in a position to impose non-reciprocal trade agreements to US advantage, Washington is engaged in currency manipulation in order to increase market shares at the expense of the highly competitive emerging economies of Latin America and Asia, as well as Germany. Equally prejudicial to Latin America, the Federal Reserve’s lowering of interest rates leads to heavy borrowing in the US in order to speculate in high interest countries like Brazil. The consequences are disastrous, as a flood of “hot money”, speculative funds flow into Latin America, especially Brazil, overvaluing the currency and provoking a speculative bubble in bonds and real estate, while encouraging excess liquidity and public and private consumer debt. Equally damaging the overvalued currencies price industrial and manufacturing out of world market competition, threatening to “de-industrialize” the economies and further their dependency on agro-mineral exports. US resort to unilateral protectionism tells us that the decline in US economic power has reached a point where it struggles to compete with Latin America rather than to reassert its former dominant position. Protectionism is a defense mechanism of an empire in decline. While Washington can pretend otherwise, the weapons it chooses to arrest its loss of competitiveness in the short run, sets in motion a process of growing Latin America integration and increased trade with Asian economies, which will deepen Latin America’s economic independence from US control.

Latin America’s Center-Left and the US: Economic Ties Trump Geopolitical Strategies

The consolidation of Latin America’s center-left regimes has had major consequences for US policy, namely a reconciliation between arch-adversary Venezuela and Washington’s foremost ally, Colombia. The power of the market, in this case over $4 billion in Colombian exports to Venezuela, has trumped the dubious advantage (if any) of being Washington’s military launching pad in Latin America. The election of Lula’s chosen candidate Dilma Rousseff as President of Brazil, the likely re-election of Chavez in Venezuela and Cristina Fernandez in Argentina, means that Washington has little leverage to reverse the dynamic diversification and greater autonomy of Latin America’s leading economies. Moreover, as the political rapprochement between Venezuela and Colombia, including the mutual extradition of Colombian guerrillas and drug traffickers demonstrates, closer economic relations are accompanied by warmer political relations, including a tacit pact in which Colombia abjures from supporting the rightwing opposition in Venezuela, while the latter does likewise toward the Left opposition to Santos. The larger meaning of this obscuring of ideological boundaries is that Latin America’s economic integration advances at the expense of US prompted ideological divisions. The net result will be the further exclusion and diminution of the US as the dominant actor in the Southern Hemisphere. At the same time it should be remembered that we are writing about greater capitalist integration, which means the continued marginalization of class based trade unions and social movements from strategic economic policy making positions. In other words, the decline of US hegemony is not matched by an increase in working class or popular power. As both decline, the big winner is the rising business class, mostly, but not exclusively the agro-mineral, financial and manufacturing elites linked to the Latin American and Asian markets. The prime destabilization danger now includes US currency wars, the growing potentially volatile extractive exports and the high levels of dependence on China’s (and Asian) appetite for raw materials. Imperial Wars, Free Trade and the Lumpen Legacy of 1990’s One of the paradoxes leading to the current eclipse of US hegemony in Latin America is found in the very military and economic successes in the 1990’s. A broad swathe of North and Central American and the Andean countries has witnessed the rise of what we call “lumpen political-economic power” which has devastated the formal economy and legitimate political authority. The concept of “lumpen” is derived from ‘lupus’ or Latin for ‘wolf’ a metaphor for a ‘predatory’ actor, or in our context, the rise of a political and economic class which preys upon the public and private resources and institutions of an economy and society. The lumpen power elites are based on the creation of a dual system of legitimate and illegitimate political authority backed by the instruments of coercion and violence. The emergence and formation of a powerful lumpen class of predatory capitalists and their accompanying military entourage is what we refer to in writing of the “process of lumpenization”. Today “lumpenization” no longer merely entails the overt violent organizers of illicit production, processing and distribution of drugs but an entire array of ‘offspring’ economic activity (kidnapping, immigrant smugglers, etc.) as well as large scale long term interaction with ‘legitimate’ economic institutions and sectors, including banking, real estate, agriculture, retail shopping centers, tourist complexes, to name a few. Money laundering of illicit funds is an important growth sector, especially providing important flows of capital to and from major US and Latin American financial institutions. Today over three-quarters of Mexico’s territory and governance is contested by over 30,000 organized armed lumpen led by centralized political-economic formations. Central America is a major transit point, production center and terrain for bloody lumpen struggles for power and revenue collection. Colombia is the major center for ‘raw material production’of drugs, marketing,and import and export center under the leadership of powerful lumpen capitalists with long standing ties to the governing political, military and economic elite. The lumpen economy has supply chains further south in Peru, Bolivia and Paraguay and distribution networks through Venezuela and Brazil as well as multi-billion dollar money laundering and financial links in the Caribbean, the US, Uruguay and Argentina. Several important issues to keep in mind in discussing the lumpen political economy.These include: (1)the growth in size, scope and significance over the past 20 years (2) the increasing economic importance as the ‘legitimate’ economy goes into crises (both cause and consequence) (3) the increasing public cynicism as previously thought of “legitimate” economic and political actors (capitalists) engage in multi-billion dollar financial swindles and are “bailed” out by political leaders. The ‘boom’ in lumpen political-economic growth can be dated to the end of the 1980’s and early 1990’s, coinciding with several major historical events in the region. These include: the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement; the US-oligarchy defeat of the revolutionary movements in Central America and the demobilization but not disarmament of the paramilitary and armed militia; the total militarization and paramilitarization of Colombia especially with the advent of Plan Colombia (2001) and the end of peace negotiations; the deregulation of the US financial system in the mid 1990’s and the growth of a financial bubble economy. What is striking about all the countries and regions experiencing ‘deep lumpenization’, is the profound disarticulation of their economies and smashing of their social fabric due to free trade agreements with the US (Mexico and Central America) and the large scale US military intervention during their civil wars (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Colombia). The US politico-military intervention left millions without work and worse, destroyed the possibility of reformist or revolutionary political alliances coming to power and carrying out meaningful structural changes. The restoration of US backed neo-liberal-militarist collaborator regimes left the young unemployed peasants and workers with three choices: (1)submit to degradation and poverty (2) emigrate to North America or Europe (3) join one or another of the narco-trafficking organizations, as a risky but lucrative route out of poverty. The timing of the rise and dynamic growth of lumpen power coincides with the imposition of US free trade and political victories in the aforementioned regions. From the early 1990’s forward lumpen power spreads across the region fueled by NAFTA decimating the Mexican small producers and the US imposed Central American “peace accords” which effectively destroyed the chances of socio-economic change and dismantled but did not disarm the militias and paramilitary gunmen.

Case Studies of Lumpen Dual Power: Mexico

Mexico, unlike the other major economies of Latin America did not experience any popular upheavals or center-left electoral outcomes during the late 1990’s or early 2000. Unlike Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and Ecuador, in which new center-left regimes came to power imposing regulatory controls on financial speculation, Mexico witnessed electoral fraud and signed off on NAFTA, deepening its ties to Wall Street. As a result it experienced a series of financial shocks, undermining its capacity to launch a more diversified trading and investment model. Unlike Argentina which launched state directed employment generating investment policies, Mexico, under US tutelage, relied on emigration and overseas remittances to compensate for the loss of millions of jobs in agriculture , small and medium manufacturing activity and retail sales. While popular uprisings and mobilization in Latin America led to the rise of center-left regimes capable of securing greater independence in economic policy from the US and the IMF, the Mexican elite literally stole elections in 1988 and 2006, blocking the possibility of an alternative model. It successfully repressed alternative peasant movements in Chiapas, Oaxaca and Guerrero unlike the successes in Bolivia and Ecuador. While the center-left regimes captured the economic surplus from the agro-mineral sectors and increased public and private investment in production and social spending, Mexico witnessed massive illegal and legal outflows of investments into speculative ventures in the US: an outflow of over $55 billion between 2006-2010. Regional migration within Latin America fueled by high growth, led to rising income; overseas immigration depleted Mexico of skilled and unskilled labor; in some cases ‘return migration’ from the US of deported gang members, with arms and drug networks fueled the growth of lumpen power . With the severe recession, US immigration policy led to the closing of the border, the massive deportation of Mexican immigrants and the decline of the major source of foreign earnings: remittances. Pervasive and deep corruption throughout the cupula of the Mexican political and economic system, combined with the decline of the legitimate economy, the absence of channels for popular redress and Washington’s insistence that militarization and not social investments was the solution to rising crime, led to the huge influx of young recruits to the growing network of lumpen-capitalist directed narco enterprises. With almost all US and Mexican financial institutions and arms vendors as willing partners and an unlimited pool of young recruits with a ‘lean and hungry look’, Mexico evolved into a fiercely contested terrain between a half dozen rival lumpen organizations,and the Mexican military, with nearly 30,000 deaths between 2006-2010.

Lumpenization: Central America

Drug gangs dominate the streets of the major cities and countryside of all the countries which were militarized during the US backed counter-revolutionary wars between the 1960’s to early 1990’s. US proxy military dictators and their civilian clients, in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Honduras decimated civil society and particularly the mass popular organizations. In El Salvador over 75,000 people were killed and hundreds of thousands were uprooted, driven across borders or into urban shanty towns. In Guatemala over 200,000 mostly Mayan Indians were murdered by the US trained “special forces” and over 450 villages were obliterated in the course of a scorched earth policy. In Nicaragua, the Somoza dictatorship and the subsequent US financed and trained counter-revolutionary (“contra”) mercenary army killed and maimed close to 100,000 people and devastated the economy. In Honduras, the US embassy promoted and financed in-country and cross-border counter-insurgency operations which killed, uprooted and forced thousands of Honduran peasants into exile. Highly militarized Central American societies, in which US funded and armed death squads murdered with impunity, in which the economy of small producers was shattered and ‘normal’ market activity was subject to military assaults, led to the growth of illegal crops, drug and people smuggling. With the so-called “peace agreements”, the leaders of the insurgents became “institutionalized”in elite electoral politics,while large numbers of unemployed ex-guerrillas and demobilized death squad militia members found no place in the status quo. The neo-liberal order imposed by the US client rulers with its free market ideology built “fortress neighborhoods”, hired an army of private “security” guards, while the productive bases of small scale agriculture was destroyed. Millions of Central Americans faced the familiar “routes out of poverty”: outmigration, forming or joining criminal gangs, or attempting to find an economic niche in an unpromising environment. Outmigration for semi-educated former members of armed bands led to their early entrée into armed groups, deportation back to Central America, swelling the ranks of narco traffickers in their “home country”. Highly repressive immigration policies implemented in the new millennium closed the escape valve for most Central Americans fleeing violence and poverty. Former guerrilla fighters and their families, abandoned by their former leaders embedded in electoral parties, turned their military experience toward carving a new living, as security guards for the rich, or as armed traffickers competing for ‘market shares’ with and against the discharged deathsquad militia members. Between 2000-2010, the annual number of homicides exceeded the number of deaths suffered during the worst period of the civil wars of the 1980s. US imposed peace agreements and the neo-liberal order which resulted, led to the total lumpenization of the economy and polity throughout the region, the practice of electoral politics and even the election of “center-left” politicos in El Salvador and Nicaragua notwithstanding. Lumpenization was a direct consequence of the ‘scorched earth’ and ‘mass uprooting’ counter-insurgency policies which were central to US re-establishing dominance in the region. Economic and personal insecurity and social misery were the price paid by imperial Washington to prevent a popular revolution.

Case Study: Colombia

The ties between the world centers of finance and the most degenerate and blood curdling ruler in the Western Hemisphere were most evident in the slavishly laudatory puff-pieces published in the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal in praise of President Alvaro Uribe, while over 3 million Colombians were driven off their lands, several thousands were murdered, over a thousand trade unionists, journalists and human rights activists were killed. Two thirds of his Congressional backers were financed by narco-traffickers. Incarcerated deathsquad leaders identified top military officials as their primary supporters. All of Colombia’s Presidents collaborated closely with US military missions and all were financed and associated with the multi-billion dollar drug cartels, even as the Pentagon claimed to be engaged in a “war against drug trafficking”. Landlords and their financial and real estate backers organized private militias, which terrorized, uprooted and killed hundreds of thousands of peasants, others fled to the urban slums, or across the border to neighboring countries. Others joined the guerrillas, and still others were recruited by the death squads and military. With the advance of the guerrilla armies and then President Pastrana’s opening to peace negotiations, President Clinton launched a $5 billion dollar military scheme, “Plan Colombia” to quadruple Colombia’s air and ground forces and deathsquads. With Washington’s backing, Alvaro Uribe, a notorious narco-deathsquad politico, so identified by US officials, took power and launched a massive scorched earth policy, murdering and displacing millions of peasants and urban slum dwellers in an effort to undermine the vast network of community organizations sympathetic to the agrarian reform, public investment and anti-military program of the guerrilla movements. Mass terror and population flight emptied whole swathes of the countryside; livelihoods were destroyed and landlords in alliance with drug cartel bosses and Generals seized millions of acres of land. For the financial and respectable mass media, the massification of terror mattered not: the insurgents were ‘contained’, driven back, put on the defensive. They trumpeted the killing of key guerrilla leaders: foreign corporate property was secure. Rule by Uribe, the military and the narco-death squads secured US power and influence and created an ideal “jumping off” location for destabilizing the democratically elected Venezuelan President Chavez. The latter was especially important by the mid 2000’s when Washington’s internal assets attempted coup and lockout were resoundingly defeated in 2002-03. Having gained strategic territorial advantage over the guerrillas, Washington in collaboration with Uribe moved to shift the balance of power between the narco-deathsquads and the state: a disarmament and demobilization and amnesty was proclaimed. The result was detailed revelations of the deep structural links between narco-deathsquads and the Uribe police state regime, up to and including family members and cabinet ministers. While ‘nominally’ the cartels are in retreat, in fact, they have become decentralized .Equally important top politicos and military officials continue to collaborate in the production, processing and shipping of billion dollar cocaine exports … with major US banks laundering illicit funds.

Rule of Lumpen-Capitalism in the Imperial System

Drug trafficking has deep roots in the economies of North and South America and has profound ramifications throughout their societies. One cannot understand the tremendous growth of US banking and financial centers if not for the $25 to $50 billion dollar yearly income and transfers from laundering drug funds and double that amount from illegal money transfers by business and political leaders directly and indirectly benefiting from the drug trade. Lumpen capitalists, their collaborators, facilitators paramilitary mercenaries and military partners play a major political role in sustaining the imperial system. Washington’s major influence and principle area of dominance resides in those countries where lumpen power and deathsquad operations are most prevalent, namely Central America, Colombia and Mexico. Both phenomena are derived from US designed ‘scorched earth’ counter-insurgency strategies that prevented alterations, modifications or reforms of the neo-liberal order and blocked the successful emergence of social movements and center-left regimes as took place in most of Latin America. The contemporary imperial system relies on lumpen capitalists, their economic networks and military formations in practically every major area of conflict even as these collaborators are constant areas of friction. As in Afghanistan and Iraq today and in Central America in the recent past and in Latin America under the military dictatorships, the US relies on drug traffickers, military gangsters engaged in extortion, kidnapping, property seizures and the pillage of public property and treasury to destroy popular movements, to divide and conquer communities and above all to terrorize the general public and civil society. The singular growth of the financial sector especially in the US is in part the result of its being the massive recipient of large scale sustained flows of ‘plunder capital’ by lumpen rulers and their economic partners via ‘political crony’ privatizations, foreign loans which never entered the local economy and other such forms of pillage characteristic of ‘predator’ classes. The deep structural affinities between Wall Street speculators and Latin lumpen-capitalists provided the backdrop for the ascendancy of a new class of lumpen financiers in the imperial financial centers: bogus bonds, mortgage swindles, falsified assessments by stock ratings agencies, trillion dollar raids on state treasuries define the heart and soul of contemporary imperialism. If it is true that the promotion and financing of lumpen warlord capitalists was an essential defense mechanism at the periphery of the empire to contain popular insurgencies, it is also true that the growth of lumpen capitalism severely weakened the very core of the imperial economy, namely its productive and export sectors leading to uncontrollable deficits, out of control speculative bubbles and massive and sustained reductions of living standards and incomes. Lumpen classes were both the agencies for consolidating the empire and its undoing: tactical gains at the periphery led to strategic losses in the imperial centers. Imperial policymakers resort to terrorist formations resulted from their incapacity to resolve internal contradictions within a legal, electoral framework. The high domestic political cost of long term warfare led inevitably to the recruitment of mercenary lumpen armies who extracted an economic tribute for questionable loyalty. Lacking any popular constituency, mercenary armies rely on terror to secure circumstantial submission. Having secured control, local warlords preside over the rapid and massive growth of drugs and other lumpen economic practices. The alliance of empire and lumpen capitalists against modern secular and traditional insurgencies, brings together high technology weaponry and primitive clan based religious-ethnic racists in Iraq and Afghanistan and deracinated psychopaths in the case of Colombia, Mexico and Central America. For Washington military and political supremacy and territorial conquests take priority over economic gain. In the case of Colombia the scorched earth policy undermined production and lucrative trade with Venezuela. Imperial ascendancy had similar consequences in Asia, the Middle East and Central America.

When Lumpen Power becomes a Problem for the Imperial State

Lumpen capitalism develops a dynamic of its own, independent of its role as an imperial instrument for destroying popular insurgency. It challenges imperial collaborator regimes. It displaces, threatens, or cajoles foreign and domestic capitalists. In the extreme, it establishes a private army, seizes territorial control, recruits and trains networks of intelligence agents within the armed forces and police, undermining imperial influence. In a word lumpen organized military capitalism threatens the security of imperial hegemony: newly emerging predators threaten the established collaborators. The imperial attempts to use and dispose of lumpen counterinsurgency forces has failed; the demobilized paras become the professional gunmen of a “third force” – neither imperial nor insurgent. The decimation of the reformist center-left option, which took hold in Latin America, precludes a socio-economic alternative capable of integrating the young combative unemployed, stimulating the productive economy, diversifying markets and escaping the pitfalls of a US centered neo-liberal order. The divergence of priorities and strategies between Latin America’s center-left and Washington has as much to do with economic and class interests as it has with ideological agendas. For the US security means defeating the rising power of lumpen military economic formations in their remaining ‘power bases’. For Latin America, security concerns are secondary to diversifying and boosting market shares within Latin America and overseas. Lumpen power is currently under the political control of domestic rulers in Latin America; it is out of control in US clients. The US solution is military; the Latin approach is greater growth; social expenditures and police repression especially in Brazil. The Latin solution has greater attraction, evident in Colombia’s break with the US military base and encirclement strategy toward Venezuela. Colombia’s new President opted for $8 billion dollar trade deals with Venezuela’s Chavez over and against costly million dollar military base agreements with the US. Clearly the US economic decline in Latin America as a direct result of its reliance on military and lumpen power, is in full force. The driving force of accelerated decline is not popular insurgency but the attraction and lucrative opportunities of the economic marketplace within Latin America and beyond for the local ruling classes. Insofar as militarism defines the policies and strategies of the US Empire there is no remedy for the challenges of lumpen power in its ‘backyard’. And Washington has nothing on offer to recapture a dominant presence in Latin America. The world market is defeating the empire. Latin America’s twenty-first century capitalists are leading the way to further decline in imperial power.

"Going Where Men Fear to Tread," by Alpha Unit

Hermila García is dead. The 38-year-old attorney was killed by gunmen on her way to work on Monday. She was the police chief of the town of Meoqui in Chihuahua, Mexico, the state that borders Texas. She had been on the job for only two months. Reportedly there were no men willing to do it. It’s so dangerous to be a police chief these days in Chihuahua that towns there are having a rough time filling the jobs. When 20-year-old criminology student Marisol Valles García was sworn in as police chief of Praxedis G. Guerrero, Mexico, it made headlines around the world. Her predecessor had been tortured and murdered. Rival drug cartels have unleashed unprecedented carnage in Ciudad Juarez, which is the municipality seat of Juarez in Chihuahua. They are not only battling each other, but they are in conflict with Mexican security forces. Police chiefs and mayors who get in the way of the drug gangs sometimes end up murdered – along with anyone in the crossfire. So far this year there have been nearly 3,000 homicides in Ciudad Juarez. The violence has spread throughout the entire state. Two other women besides Valles García have been sworn in as chiefs of police in Chihuahua. It’s dangerous work. But somebody’s got to do it.

Sometimes They Really Are Out to Get You

Repost from the old site. While I was getting my Master’s Degree at a local university in the 1990’s, I used to read a lot of academic journals. One of my favorites were the psychology and psychiatry journals, but I read journals in all sorts of areas – medicine, linguistics, history, political science, biology, sociology, etc. I found the most interesting case study! At some time between 1991-1994, a middle-aged man presented to a Canadian mental health unit complaining that “the Mafia was trying to kill him”. (When I wrote this post, I thought the Canada part was strange because I was not sure if there was a Mafia in Canada, but Googling shows there is). He described an elaborate conspiracy involving various figures, surveillance, threats, etc. After an extensive interview, the man received a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. He stayed in the hospital, was medicated, and was released after a few weeks. About three months after his release from the mental hospital, the man was murdered…by the Mafia! This was a true case written as a letter to the editor up in one of the most respectable, peer reviewed journals. I could not believe what I read! The theme of the letter is that you have to be careful diagnosing psychosis in folks complaining of plots to kill them, because in some cases, there really are people trying to kill the person.

Psilocybin Doesn't Cause Brain Damage

Repost from the old site. Told you so. Hell, I’ve only taken it, what, 30 times or so? It never fried me, or at least I don’t think so. I never noticed any long-lasting harm after taking this drug. One time, I had bright colors for about six months after I took it. Another time, I got depressed and sat around alone on Saturday night feeling sorry for myself. Next morning, I woke up and was not depressed anymore. One time, I took some, got in my car, and drove from Los Angeles to the Owens Valley, then turned around and drove home again. I think the whole trip took me about 12-14 hours. You can drive great on the stuff if you have a nice, clear, open road in front of you, and the towering Sierra Nevada sure looks great when you are frying. Plus, the stuff keeps you awake for many hours somehow. I used to sell these mushrooms, and boy was it fun. I was a student, a schoolteacher, a paralegal and a drug dealer. I would sell quarter pounds and pounds and make insane profits like $300 for an hour’s work or so. Plus you get to feel like a spy and feel some real terror when you carry the dope around and do the deal itself. You get to drive past lots of cops with a car full of dope that could send you to jail for a long time. You look at the cops and just drive right on by like nothing is happening. You carry the dope in a briefcase and dress up like an office worker, or you carry it in an athletic bag and dress up like you’re going to gym. There’s nothing like the rush you get being out in public with a car full of felonious dope or a wallet full of tainted drug money. My friends and I dealt dope in the smart way, and most of us never got caught. We were not all totally White, but most of us were raised in a mostly-White beach town. We dressed up like college kids, office workers, gym enthusiasts, and conformed to White middle class society in every way. Yet we sold dope right in front of the cops and society’s noses for years for years and never got caught. There’s a luscious feeling in that. A friend of mine made so much money selling coke that he bought two homes in San Fransisco, one to store the coke and another to live in. He was so hot I didn’t dare even look him up. You don’t even want to hang around some super-dealer like that. I just checked him out and he’s resurfaced in Southern California, fit, healthy and fifty, selling real estate. A survivor. I guess he never got caught either. Even my Mom shakes her head in admiration of him. White society always respects someone who can outsmart the cops in a not-too-evil way. Why? It places a premium on not being stupid, and not being caught. I often wonder if other ethnics share this value. Sometimes I think that these young Blacks and Hispanics nowadays place a premium on getting caught, and therefore being a moron. This I will never understand. These Hispanic kids around here are the biggest idiots on Earth. They do dope deals, albeit for small amounts of pot, right out in the open in front of everyone. They seem to take special delight in doing an obvious drug deal right out where anyone can see it happen. I guess it’s a macho thing. White middle class me says it’s not a macho thing, it’s a stupid thing. No wonder they are always getting hauled in on dope-selling charges. They dress up like gangsters and criminals and then wonder why they get stopped by the cops. Duh. There really is an art to being a criminal. All in all, psilocybin is a fun drug. You keep hearing horror stories about this stuff, about people who took too much of it and are mentally ill, or people who took too much and are fried in some way or another. Problem is that there is not the tiniest evidence that this stuff damages your brain, unlike almost other drugs of abuse. Yes, the drugs that make you feel the most insane of all do not do the slightest harm to your brain in any way. All those stories floating around about people taking too much hallucinogens need to be taken with a grain of salt. If it’s harmless to the brain, how is it supposed to create fried-out acidheads? Answer: it’s can’t. I’m not saying take them every weekend. I haven’t taken the stuff in about 23 years, and I’m not sure if I will ever take it again. Taking these kinds of drugs is one of the most bizarre experiences that one can have on this Earth, though, and you can have some really terrifying bad trips. Psychological harm can occur from traumatic experiences. By the way, it’s not harmful to any other organ in your body either. Plus there are long-lasting positive effects, apparently. On the other hand, this drug can cause HPPD , so I’d advise against taking it. I have HPPD, but I only have bright colors, and it’s really not so bad. You’re living in a Technicolor world, and if you just accept it, the world looks a lot better this way.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)