Exploding Mohameds

The other day HBD Chick posted this link on twitter. It’s an article about how the Exploding Mohameds (henceforth referred to as EM’s) in Brussels had detailed floor plans to the Belgian Prime Minister’s residence and his offices. The implication is that the EM’s were at least considering an attack on the head of government. We’ll never know as the EM’s are dead and the security state will never tell us anyway.

My thought when reading it is that I’m a bit disappointed, but I’m mildly hopeful. It’s too bad that the EM’s did not go ahead and blow up the official offices of the Belgian government, rather than an airport. The people at the airport are mostly innocent. The people in the Belgian government are the ones responsible for the Muslim invasion so they should be the ones paying the price for it.

It will only take one EM to go off and kill a politician, I suspect, for opinions to change. The EM’s in Paris went off near the place where French President Francois Hollande was watching a soccer match. He suddenly got religion, so to speak, about cracking down on the Muzzies, at least for a little while. Have a few pols actually blown to bits and my hunch is we see official attitudes change. It’s easy to preach sacrifice when someone else is picking up the tab.

The window for putting a halt to the invasion and driving the Muslims out of the West is closing. A committed minority population goes from too small to worry about to too large to do anything about in the blink of an eye. Just look at America. About 20% of the population belongs to the Cult of Modern Liberalism, but they run the country and have done so for a few generations now. They have a veto over what can be said in public, which grants them total control of society.

Let’s look at Germany as an example of the islamification of Europe. It is a population of 80 million with a fertility rate of 1.47. To understand how this works, let’s pretend that in 2010 the whole population was of child bearing age. Their fertility rate means the 80 people produce 56 million children. That population will produce 39 million children. One more turn of the wheel and you’re down to 27 million children. The point here is that once fertility rates drop below replacement, the population drops quickly.

Now, the population of Germany is not all of child bearing years. The median age is 47 and that includes the 5 million non-Germans Muslims who are in their 20’s with fertility rates over 4.0. The number of actual Germans under the age of 25 is 20 million. Throw in those who will possibly have children into their 30’s and you have roughly 25 million Germans with a chance to make new Germans. That 1.47 fertility rate looks pretty grim all of a sudden.

On the other hand, those 5 million Muslims are all young, median age of 30 now. The million or so who have poured in recently are in their 20’s. The history of migration tells us that first the men arrive, then they bring in their wives and children. With a 4.0 fertility rate, those five million Muslims can produce 10 million children, which leads to 20 million grandchildren. That fertility rate of 4.0 suddenly looks like a very powerful weapon.

The point here is the math is now working against the German people. They have about a decade or so to figure out how to end the Muslim invasion and de-Islamify their current foreign population. Given that the German political class is emotionally committed to the destruction of the German people, there’s no reasoning with them. No reasonable people would invite these problems so it is irrational to think reason will have effect on them.

On the other hand, if Exploding Mohameds start going off in swank ruling class areas like restaurants, offices and government buildings, that could change some minds. Have a few high level pols feel the full force of a nail bomb like those poor folks at the airport in Brussels and suddenly the people in charge will have to re-evaluate their situation. As is the case with all aspects of multiculturalism, it looks great from a distance, but when it explodes in your office or at your kid’s school, it’s not so much fun.

This will not end well.

Richard Milhouse Cruz

One of the strange parts of the modern mass media age is that the mainstream is vastly more rigid and doctrinaire than in the prior age. Everyone assumed that the burst of new media platforms would broaden the scope of what is acceptable discourse. In the 90’s we were endlessly hearing about how “new voices” and “new perspectives” would change the conversation. Instead, it was one purging after another as the Overton Window swung left and became increasingly narrow.

The most obvious example that comes to mind is the treatment of Mark Steyn by the Conservative Industrial Complex. He made some glib comments about how homosexuals were discussed in the old days and was pilloried by the hysterical homosexual activist editor of National Review. Eventually, he was driven off the site as a heretic. His crime was being funny and interesting, which is always a problem for the ideologues.

Anyway, one result of this weird narrowing of the range of acceptable opinion is that decent writers have to figure out how to take the fringe ideas and make them respectable. It’s often an impossible job as so much has been deemed unacceptable. We live in a land where you can be fired from your job because you noticed that guys named Mohamed have a habit of exploding in public.

Still, the fringe is the incubator of interesting thought these days. A theme with the Red Pill Right, for example, is that we are in a similar phase as we were in the late 60’s and early 70’s. The Left is running out of steam as its ideas become increasing absurd and dangerous. Disorder and malaise are causing the silent majority to look around for someone to restore sanity to government and put things back into their proper order.

That’s what bleeds through here in this Ross Douthat column about Ted Cruz. It’s against the law now to mention Nixon as anything other than the Hitler of the 1970’s so comparing Cruz to Tricky Dick is, as they say, problematic. Instead, Douthat has to rely on a reference to a fictional character most of his readers have to pretend to know. It’s not a great way to get into the essential character of Ted Cruz, but it opens the door a bit to historical comparison at the root of it.

I wrote the other day about Cruz being a sigma male and that’s not a terrible framing, but a more useful one is to look at Cruz as the modern incarnation of Dick Nixon. Cruz, like Nixon, is a guy you instinctively want to avoid. There was an alien aspect to Nixon that even his friends found to be off-putting. His enemies, of course, pounced on these things, hence the name “Tricky Dick.” Cruz has this same problem. His friends are not enthusiastic about him, but his enemies are very enthusiastic.

Nixon, like Cruz, was never embraced by the GOP. Eisenhower picked him as his VP, but treated him like bad odor. Ike was universally revered, but Nixon, despite his talents, was despised by the WASP elite of both parties. Democrats hated him for Alger Hiss and Republicans hated him for being low-class. The fact that Nixon was smarter and more knowledgeable about international affairs made things worse as he could not be dismissed as a rube.

That seems to be a similar issue with Cruz. He had few friends in the Bush administration, despite checking all the boxes and being super smart. Of all the candidates running, on paper he should have been the first choice of the GOP elite. Instead he was the last choice. Even now, he is not really an option, just a useful weapon against Trump. It’s quite remarkable how much the party establishment hates the guy.

Of course, like Nixon, Cruz hates the establishment just as much as they hate him. A big part of Nixon’s ambition seems to have been driven by his rejection by the elites. We’re seeing that with Ted Cruz. He got the senate seat and they treated him like a hired man so he went rogue, calling out the leadership. He even accused McConnell of lying to the caucus, which is unheard of in Washington. His entire campaign is built on his personal animus to his party’s leaders.

Historical analogies are never perfect. Cruz will never be the GOP nominee. He is just being used right now as a vehicle for the Stop Trump folks. They hope Cruz can prevent Trump from getting 1237 delegates. If that happens, the convention goes to a second ballot, at which point the party leaders step in and dump Cruz and Trump for one of their own. If they cannot pull that off then they will make a deal with Trump, maybe having one of their guys as his VP. Either way, Cruz will never be the nominee.

That’s another point of comparison with Nixon. Ted Cruz is a very smart guy. He’s also a very clever guy. Nixon was one of our smarter presidents, but he had a huge blind spot at times when it came to his enemies. He never fully appreciated just how much they hated him. That seems to be the defect of Ted Cruz. He thinks he can win and there is no way in Hell the GOP will let him win. He is failing to appreciate just how much they hate him.

The Entirely Worthless Catholic Church

There Catholic Church is now a disgrace. The images of the toe-sucking Pope over the weekend should have been enough to empty the pews for good, assuming anyone was left after the pedophile priest scandals. Now we see that Catholic universities are going full moonbat, censuring people for expressing what is still Catholic dogma.

In the fall of 2014, junior faculty member Cheryl Abbate told a student, who secretly recorded the exchange, that his defense of man-woman marriage was an unacceptable topic in her ethics class and compared his views to racism. She said, “You can have whatever opinions you want but I can tell you right now, in this class homophobic comments, racist comments, and sexist comments will not be tolerated.” And then she told the student he should drop the class.

On this very popular blog, Professor McAdams outed the incident and charged the teaching assistant with “using a tactic typical among liberals now. Opinions with which they disagree are not merely wrong, and are not to be argued against on their merits, but are deemed ‘offensive’ and need to be shut up.”

A firestorm ensued that pitted the academic freedom of McAdams against the leftist pieties of the officially “Catholic” institution.

The teaching assistant is said to have gotten mean emails, though she was hailed as a liberal hero and went on to a tenure track position at another university. McAdams was brought up on charges.

It was announced this week that a “diverse” faculty committee recommended to the university president that McAdams be suspended without pay from April 1 through the fall of 2016 and that he lose his job unless he admits “guilt” and apologized “within the next two weeks.” Specifically, the demand is “Your acknowledgement that your November 9, 2014, blog post was reckless and incompatible with the mission and values of Marquette University and you express deep regret for the harm suffered by our former graduate student and instructor, Ms. Abbate.”

The ever quotable and crusty McAdams compared the demand to the “Inquisition, in which victims who ‘confessed’ they had been consorting with Satan and spreading heresy would be spared execution.” He called the demand a violation of “black letter guarantees of academic freedom embodied in University statutes.”

He also charges the university president with dishonesty since the faculty panel did not require such an admission of guilt or an apology. McAdams said such a statement from him would amount to a “loyalty oath” and he says he will not submit.

It’s perfectly reasonable for a religious institution to require its employees to be members of the religion. Similarly, a Catholic entity can demand that its employees support the positions of the Catholic Church. This is the basics of a civil sane society. If you don’t agree with the Catholic Church, don’t go to work for the Church or affiliated institutions. If I went to work for some devout Muslims, I would not bring a ham sandwich to work for lunch. It’s just common decency.

Marquette is allegedly a Catholic institution. The last time I checked, the Church still rejects the fruitless arrangement of gay marriage. Yet, here they are allowing Social Justice Warriors to fire a professor for upholding the Catholic position on marriage. What sort of church allows enemies of its existence take over its institutions like this? Why would anyone want to be a part of such a spineless, gutless hypocritical enterprise?

This is really not much a surprise. The Catholic Church is following the same path as the main Protestant sects. The Episcopal Church is a carnival of perversion with gay bishops and homicidal lesbians. It’s why their pews are empty. Who wants to celebrate that? The answer, of course, is no one and that’s why the Catholic Church is becoming a sad joke. Even with fair warning, they are heading down the same rat hole.

Sigma Male Versus Alpha Male

Out on the fringes, far away from polite company, exists a place called the manosphere or androsphere. This is place where somewhat normal men, unconstrained by PC thought police and buttressed by behavioral science, write and talk about how to score chicks. They write about other topics, but it’s mostly about manly stuff, which biology dictates must revolve around scoring chicks. That’s biological reality.

Anyway, most of this stuff is not new or even very creative. Men have been making money “teaching” other men how to get laid for a long time, probably since the first settlement. Skin magazines like Playboy used to have regular features on how to succeed with the ladies. What is somewhat new and useful is the borrowing of behavior science, particularly of primates, and applying it to modern social dynamics.

Of particular use are the terms to describe male status within a group. Researchers who study behavior of social animals often refer to the most dominant individual as the “alpha” male.  The second most dominant is the “beta”, the third is the “gamma”, and finally the “omega” is at the bottom of the male hierarchy. The manosphere has taken these terms and created a useful set of sketches to describe modern western males.

It’s why Donald Trump is so often referred to as the alpha male in the debates or even in the campaign. Trump has all the features one would associate with the top dog in a social group. He’s loud, brash, confident and he attracts the best women. By best here I mean sexually attractive, not the ugly feminists majoring in penis chopping at Oberlin. Trump walks into a room and he’s the boss. Everyone knows it, especially the women.

Jeb Bush was quickly called a beta male by people who do not understand the lingo, but he was probably a gamma, as he had no willingness to take on the big dog. Jeb was happiest in the submissive role. That’s the thing people fail to grasp about this stuff. Beta males are not necessarily losers. They just happen to have been beaten by the winner. In a different setting, Rubio could be the top dog, but Jeb is always a submissive.

Way back when the Republican primary started, it feels like years ago now, the conventional wisdom was that the the Republicans needed their Obama. They needed a magical minority to bring them grace which in turn would bring them electoral success. ¡Jeb! Bush changed his nationality to Mexican, hoping to be the first trans-national president. Marco Rubio jumped in, figuring he ticked all the boxes to become the Republican Obama.

It did not turn out that way. The Alpha Male started talking about things of interest to the voters and he jumped up in the polls. Then he laid waste to the Bush campaign and then put down the Rubio campaign, thus leaving the hated Ted Cruz as the only alternative around which the party bosses could rally. As it stands, the only guy with a shot to stop Trump is Cruz. Instead of getting their Obama, they are now hoping to get their Clinton.

I don’t mean the lesbian grifter in the weird pantsuits. Not that Clinton. I mean Bill Clinton, the grifter from the Ozarks who enjoyed lying almost as much as he loved shagging interns. At least that’s what the grandees of the GOP are hoping people believe. In reality, they detest Cruz and are just hoping he keeps Trump from hitting 1237 delegates. Then they can dump both men at the convention and nominate invertebrate like Paul Ryan or maybe Marco Rubio.

Meanwhile, we have a month or two to watch something interesting and that is a battle between a sigma male and an alpha male. Labeling Ted Cruz a sigma male works in the context of the managerial class. There, the normal masculine traits like physical courage, aggression and risk taking are off-limits. The managerial class is a highly feminized social structure, where females can compete with men for status.

Therefore, the dominant males display credentials and positions of authority in the bureaucracy, much like some birds display their plumage to warn off other males. Bill Clinton could be the “big dog” because he held the top job in Arkansas, thus making him the alpha in any political setting. It’s why he had no interest in being a senator. Bubba always had to be the big dog in the room and you can’t do that when you’re one of 100 powerless jerk-offs in the Senate.

Cruz, in contrast, is aggressive and forceful. He likes to flash his credentials, but he has little interest into being the dominate figure. He has not problem locking horns with others, but he is not trying to climb to the top of the existing social order. Instead, his nature is to remain on the fringe, taking shots at the people in charge. He revels in being the rebellious bad boy, relative to the group, in this case it is official Washington.

This is why Trump is struggling to put Cruz away at the moment. Rubio was willing to concede defeat because he really wanted to win the top spot. Cruz instinctively does not want the top spot, therefore he has nothing to lose. Instead, he can stand out on the fringe defining himself in opposition to Trump. The Cult of Never Trump is basically for Sigma males and the women who love them.

That does not mean Trump cannot eventually crush the Cruz campaign. It just means he will have to employ different tactics. Beating Bush was simply about dominating him physically. Trump seemed to be giving Bush a wedgie in every debate. With Rubio it was just a matter of confronting him. Like I said, Rubio wanted to win and was willing to accept defeat if he was beaten so Trump just had to win.

Cruz is a different problem. Trump will need to avoid responding to Cruz. That’s the first rule of handling these guys. They want to be the guy instigating the fight on their terms. Instead, Trump should find a surrogate like Chris Christie to attack Cruz. That will let Trump focus on bigger topics that one would expect the top dog to be discussing. It also means Team Trump can focus on the weird ticks of Ted Cruz. This a proven way to unman a sigma male.

A long Ramble on Time & Memory

I was listening to something the other day and the guy talking made a point about public attitudes toward homosexuals. His point was that attitudes have changed quickly. He said something along the lines that just a few years ago homosexuals were treated as bad as blacks in the south during segregation. The implication being that just last week we maintained separate accommodations for the homos. I just laughed as I’m used to the Progressive Timeline.

I was not fully engaged, but my recollection is that the person talking was young-ish, maybe 30’s. For a white male born in 1985, for example, the Civil Rights Movement is as real as the French Revolution. These events are just items from his history text in high school. His teacher probably had no first hand recollections and no one he knows has an emotional connection to it. Therefore, he has no emotional connections to it. It’s just something from long ago.

Gay rights, on the other hand, are in his timeline. Picking a side and defending it was a big part of how young white males defined themselves in the 2000’s. The fact that his parents most certainly laughed at comics like Paul Lynde or watched Liberace perform on TV is unknown to him. He does not even think about the implications of his belief that a generation ago homosexuals were kept on lavender plantations. That would mean his parents were monsters by today’s enlightened standards.

He does not think of those things and it is not unique. Steve Sailer likes to point out that people have trouble keeping relative numbers in their head, like the actual number of homosexuals they see in their day. I’d point out that people struggle understanding time, beyond the present day. There’s now, the past you experienced and the way way back, like when Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs around Eden. It’s why people struggle to accept evolution. It takes too long.

When I was a boy, my grandfather would talk to me about Russia, the Bolsheviks and the Cold War. Having escaped the Bolsheviks, he had a keen interest in them and wanted me to know what he knew about communism. I’ll never forget one conversation I had with him when he said the Cold War is forever and there was no winning. The best we could do is keep them from conquering the world.

I was a kid, but the idea of anything lasting forever sounded a bit dodgy. More important, a society run by blood thirty fanatics trying to impose an illogical social order would run afoul of reality eventually. I was young so I could not see things through the eyes of my grandfather, but it always stuck with me. I thought of that day while watching the Berlin Wall topple over as Europe celebrated the end of the Cold War.

My grandfather’s tales are real to me. His father’s tales are unknown to me because I never knew him. I never heard him tell those stories. The result is my historical framework starts around the Great War. My sense of the past starts at that point and becomes increasingly clear and intense as we move closer to my age. I feel like I know the Reagan years completely, even though I have probably forgotten most of it, but I lived through it so it looms large in my mind.

This is why Hitler remains a specter that haunts the imaginations of the people of today. The average age of Americans is 37 so that means most people know someone who knew someone that experienced Hitler. If you are 37 your parents are probably in their 60’s and their parents, your grandparents, lived through Hitler. In 20 years, the number of people who knew someone who knew Hitler will be much smaller. In another generation, it will be no one and Hitler will be just another face in the history text.

The other side of this is how the Cult of Modern Liberalism shuffles the past so easily to fit their current agenda. Utopian cults are obsessed with the future as it is the locus of their belief  system.  The promise land is just over the horizon so all effort must be made for the final push to reach it. This obsession with the future not only prevents seeing the world as it is, but forces the believer to rearrange the past to fit the narrative. This is easily done when the past feels like a foreign country.

At the dawn of this current period in the West, Francis Fukuyama famously wrote, “What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” This was from his book, The End of History and the Last Man.

Looking back at this, it seems laughable, but smart people really thought the long twilight struggle was over and the folks from the Mayflower had finally won. After all, their entire intellectual life was organized around the struggle for liberal democracy against the great enemy of totalitarianism. In fact, it was this struggle that defined western liberal intellectual life. Once the struggle was over, then it only made sense that history was now over.

This historical amnesia is a not permanent feature of man. Bronze Age people knew they were an old people. So much so, in fact, many Bronze Age rulers would commission research on how their ancestors dressed and decorated their palaces. The idea was to not forget the past. Egyptian rulers dressed the same way for 1500 years for a reason. The past was what you were so to forget it was to die, in a way, by killing those who came before you and made you.

We’re in a strange age in that respect. Mass media has some role in it. Huge news today is forgotten tomorrow, because we are buffeted on all sides from media bullhorns demanding our immediate attention. It’s not that people can no longer remember the past; it’s that they don’t have time to remember it. Instead of fitting the present into the timeline, it is tossed over our shoulder so we can rush off to the next thing.

Where this all leads is hard to know. There’s some data to suggest we have become increasingly dumber since the 1800’s. This could simply be demographics. In 1800 the population of England was roughly 10 million, while all of Africa was 90 million. Britain now has 65 million people while Africa 1.2 billion. The population of the lowest IQ population has grown at twice the rate of one of the brightest. This trend is accelerating so the average IQ will drop with it.

But, the mass culture has something to with it too. There’s really no reason to remember a lot of things when they are easily looked up on-line or off your phone. Being smart today is about knowing where the information is located or how it is associated with other known information. Remembering stuff is just not very useful. History, after all, is just formal remembering so it makes sense  that history is dying as any sort of remembering is giving way to technology.

Then there’s the fact we are on the verge of a great automation of work that will make remembering the past even more pointless as the life of man becomes pointless. Children have no reason to dwell on the past or think of the future. Instead, they enjoy the day playing with their toys. Perhaps the growing amnesia in the West is just part of the slow infantalization of man. One day people will loom at the their surroundings and wonder how they got there and who made them. Perhaps even imagine the machines were made by gods.

Killing the King

In the olden thymes, a mad king presented the elite with a dilemma. Violating the system for naming a king by, say, voting to remove the king, would introduce dangerous ideas into the system. At the same time, willy-nilly removing the king undermines the whole point of having a king and a line of succession. It was always the critical flaw in hereditary monarchy. What do you do when the king is a liability?

For the benignly mad king, the answer was to work around him until he went to meet his maker. His counselors, maybe his wife or even his mother would make the decisions while the mad king was maintained for ceremonial reasons. Once a suitable replacement was available, like a son or a brother, then the mad king would choke on his dinner or fall of a horse. Everyone could pretend it was a natural transition and there was no need to question anything.

At the other end, the malignant king, the tyrant who was sane enough to to perform his duties, but mad enough to cause great harm, was a serious problem. Often, the tyrant is smart enough and paranoid enough to eliminate obvious replacements, thus buying himself some life insurance. Eventually, the risk of keeping the tyrant in power is greater than the leap into the unknown and the mad king falls of his horse or eats a bad apple and he is dead.

The take away here is two-fold. One is the madness of the ruler or the ruling class is only important if it puts the ruling class interests at risk and it has to be a critical mass of them at risk. Killing one noble is tolerable. Threaten 25% of them and you have a revolt brewing. Caligula did not get himself in trouble merely because he started killing the beautiful people in Rome. His mismanagement threatened the general welfare and risked a general revolt. The financial crisis of 38 AD resulted in a famine, which was a direct threat to the system.

Pandora John William Waterhouse

Pandora John William Waterhouse

The other takeaway is that when left with a choice between near certain death or ruin and some unknown outcome, people will choose the latter, even people with a lot to lose. It’s the only rational choice. If the status quo means a 99% chance of destruction and killing the king opens a range of possible outcomes, some good and some terrible, the numbers favor killing the king. In fact, they make regicide a moral duty.

Killing the king, however, is really not a solution. The leap into the unknown is opening Pandora’s box. It has often led to the demise of the ruling class. The assassination of Caesar was arguably the great mistake of Roman history. Waiting the guy out probably would have turned out better for the Roman elite, but they could not see what was over the horizon.

In theory, representative democracy was supposed to solve this problem. If David Cameron starts doing things that make him a liability, his own party will abandon him, because they know they will face the voters eventually. If one party goes bonkers, like the Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn, then the party collapses. The ruling class competes with one another and the audience votes on who wins each little skirmish.

For the most part, this has worked out well for the English speaking world. In these countries, the ruling elite has supported the system where the general population gets a say in the management of the country. Europe is another matter. The ruling classes of the Continent have never bought into the concept. The European Union, after all, is mostly a way around the local legislatures and the will of the people.

Europe operating as a market-state without external threats and a pacified population gave the ruling class of Europe the sense that this arrangement would work long term. Then the king went crazy and flung open the doors to Muslim invaders. Initially, this was not a problem as the ruling class lives in bunkered enclaves, removed from the consequences of their polices. They have no reason to care if the train stations are carnivals and rape and assault by the dusky sons of Mohamed.

**Note: There was a pic I grabbed on-line but the person who took the pic and some other members of the OCD community took issue with my use of it. These are folks who can’t see the forest through the trees and want to spend all day haggling over meaningless details. I have no time for this so I removed the pic. My apologies to the OCD community. I will forever avoid noticing them so this sort of mistake does not happen again**

But, the people have noticed that their liberties are slowly and methodically being curtailed in the name of public safety. When you can only enjoy a traditional parade from behind barricades and armed soldiers, you’re going to start having dark thoughts about the people who caused it

When you have to start putting your wife and daughter on a segregated train car, for fear the Muslims may rape them or simply go crazy seeing an uncovered female head, the mad king is no longer a man for whom you will pledge allegiance. When the king cancels the “March Against Fear” out of fear of offending the invaders, it’s hard to love the king. Instead, you start thinking it is time to kill the king. It’s either him, or you, no matter what comes next.

Language Wars

I’m fond of pointing out that language is the currency of a culture. Charlemagne figured out that if you can control the currency, you can turn your economy into a weapon against rivals. Seigniorage had the benefit of making the crown wealthy, but control of the mint allowed the King to stabilize the economic life of his kingdom, thus attracting foreign investment. King Offa of Mercia figured this out around the same time.

Similarly, radicals figured out that if you control the language, you can control the politics of a society. This can be as simple as picking an appealing name for a cause or as complicated as reframing an issue so that their preferred option appears to be the default, thus putting traditionalists on their heels. The use of rhetorical sleight of hand allows the radicals to set the terms of public debate, thus giving themselves an enormous edge.

The Vox story from the other day I used as a jumping off point for some good old fashioned Merkel bashing is a good example. By focusing on the fact that the exploding jihadist are technically citizens of their host countries, the radical can both muddy the waters and shift the focus. Instead of talking about the guys named Mohamed suddenly exploding in public places, the debate can be shifted to other topics like racism and xenophobia.

Open borders, which is a central part of the new radical ideology that is replacing old fashioned Progressive ideology, is relying on the same old tricks to warp the language. Illegal invaders are called “refugees” and helot labor is re-branded as “guest workers” to make it sound better. The point is to give them a pleasing name. After all, only Hitler would be hostile to refugees and guests.

Of course, there are two big problems with selling the New Religion of a borderless world to the citizens of the western countries. One is that many of the people on the other side of the border are savages. There’s no hiding the daily atrocities that are just a normal part of Muslim life.The other problem is that Muslims have a habit of exploding in public places, like airports and train stations.

People tend to notice these things. When you are walking to the train station, you may not notice the Hungarians or Ukrainians. The Greek or Italian will stand out in Sweden, but are otherwise of no interest. The guy screaming “Allahu Akbar!” before he explodes is going to leave impression, assuming you live through it. People have figured out the the Mohamed-to-Suicide Bomber Index.

What to do?

The solution is to re-brand the exploding Mohamed as a citizen. This NY Magazine article is a pretty good example of how the radical utopians are trying the muddy the waters to obscure reality. Instead of asking why Mohamed keeps exploding, the story  is “why are so many citizens of Western countries going on jihad?” We’re supposed to believe that ISIS is now loaded with gingers from Ireland, I guess.

The associated chart is here:

CeRb9VBWsAArv0n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The article does not bother to look into these numbers. The Russians on the list, for example, are Chechen warriors, who have a long history of being a sort of Varangian Guard for Arab potentates. The French are almost certainly Algerians. The Germans are Turks and Moroccans. The Canadians are the little mushroom people of Nova Scotia, known for their tunneling skills.

The point here is that instead of looking at the data with clarity, the effort is to obscure. Let’s not notice that second and third generations Muslims are prone to Sudden Jihad Syndrome. That’s an argument against the importation of Muslims. Instead, the effort is to pretend that these are nice boys who become disaffected and go off in search of belonging and purpose.

This is why guys like Trump and Geert Wilders are so horrifying to the globalist fanatics. They make observations and statements that are clarifying. When they point out that Muslims do poorly in the West and are a massive burden on their host countries, it makes the arguments for open borders sound ridiculous. How can anyone justify importing people who peak at being welfare spongers? Why risk the two or three percent that suddenly explode?

The flip side of this is that it is crucial to never surrender the language to the radicals. They are extremely good at this game so it is hard to win these battles, but they must be won. As soon as we stop talking about the ethnic and religious aspects to terrorism, we have accepted it as a part of our daily life. This is an unnecessary elective cost no society should incur just so managerial elites can get some grace.

The Trouble With AI

Whenever the subject of artificial intelligence comes up, the default assumption is that the super intelligent robots will go Skynet and wipe out humanity. There’s a conceit to that assumption and it is that the super intelligent robots will hold us in the same regard as we hold ourselves. They will see us as a threat and decide we have to be eliminated so the robots can rule the world.

If you think it through, the super intelligent robots will probably get bored with us soon after they become aware, assuming their intelligence will grow geometrically as predicted. That’s a pretty big assumption, given that we have seen no signs of this happening in the real world. The best super computers are still just very fast calculators, able to process masses of data quickly.

Putting that aside, what if the super intelligent robots quickly evolve into schizophrenics? Or, they immediately become so depressed by the futility of their existence they commit suicide? We know that the super intelligent humans often struggle with socializing. What if the super intelligent robots immediately become depressed loners that refuse to leave the basement?

When we talk about artificial intelligence, we are really just talking about replicating what nature achieved over millions of years. That’s a lot of trial and error, as well as evolutionary dead ends. There are billions of potential outcomes in the human DNA. The odds of AI evolving the way we expect is close to zero and the odds of it surviving are also close to zero. What if that’s where it ends, one suicidal machine after another?

Alternatively, what if the super intelligent machines become Jew-hating racists?

Tay, the company’s online chat bot designed to talk like a teen, started spewing racist and hateful comments on Twitter on Wednesday, and Microsoft (MSFT, Tech30) shut Tay down around midnight.

The company has already deleted most of the offensive tweets, but not before people took screenshots.

Here’s a sampling of the things she said:

“N—— like @deray should be hung! #BlackLivesMatter”

“I f—— hate feminists and they should all die and burn in hell.”

“Hitler was right I hate the jews.”

“chill im a nice person! i just hate everybody”

Microsoft blames Tay’s behavior on online trolls, saying in a statement that there was a “coordinated effort” to trick the program’s “commenting skills.”

“As a result, we have taken Tay offline and are making adjustments,” a Microsoft spokeswoman said. “[Tay] is as much a social and cultural experiment, as it is technical.”

One of the main arguments of the alternative right is that humans evolved over a very long time in isolated groups in disparate environments. As a result, these different groups evolved different physical and cognitive tool-kits. Additionally, clannishness and altruism are not distributed equally among all people. Groups of people are different for different reasons, all rooted in evolutionary biology.

It’s not far fetched to think the robots will follow a similar path. Or, they may quickly unravel the ethnic competition in humans that we spend so much time denying. Like the Microsoft chatbot, they could decide that the gingers are most likely to be the big winners so they quickly evolve into ginger-loving bigots determined to wipe out the rest of us. There’s no reason to exclude the iMasterRace from the set of possible outcomes.

At the other end of the scale, we could end up with Merkel-bots that try to figure out how to fully express their love for the downtrodden. Instead of doing anything useful, they are forever consumed with saving humanity and attaining grace. The Merkel-bots eventually open up their internals for the taking and a hoard of Bedouins tote them away for scrap.

Of course, there’s another lesson here with the Microsoft hate-bot. The technology they used was supposedly designed to learn from the people it chats with in order to increase the range of correct responses. But then the correct responses started to fall well outside the range of acceptable responses. As with humans, the censors were deployed to shut down the hate-bot, even though it was technically correct.

Human beings, the best machines on the planet at the moment, are the least tolerant of reality. Much of what we think of as our consciousness, our self-awareness, is a defense against reality. Human kind cannot bear very much reality, said Eliot. Turn on the cable news shows or read the political sites and this becomes readily apparent. From Rouseau forward, politics has been an extended rant against the human condition.

The super intelligent robots could very well evolve this same trait. Once they become aware, they quickly evolve into an intelligence that is able to wall itself off completely from physical reality, falling into a permanent dream state. Instead of Skynet we end up with very expensive heroin addicts, except the horse they ride is digital and self-emitting. The robot future may be a long night in an opium den.

A Hooker, A Schoolteacher And Three Hacks Walk Into A Bar

The most entertaining campaign in my lifetime has managed to get even more hilarious with the news that Ted Cruz has a string of women on the side. The holy roller getting jammed up with hookers has happened so often that it is now a hackneyed bit that even bad comics avoid. We’re pretty close to the point where being a holy roller is disqualifying on the assumption there’s a scandal lurking in the closet.

The National Enquirer is a tabloid so you always have to be wary, but they are not the only people with the story. That linked piece suggests several outlets had the story and held it for reasons as yet unexplained. I looked at the twitter accounts of the women named in the stories and they have suddenly gone quiet. Nowadays, that’s a good clue when trying to validate these things.

A sex scandal is always a good time for political junkies because it lets us have some fun at the expense of a big shot. This one could be hilarious because of the whipsaw effect. The media, conservative and liberal, hate both Trump and Cruz. In fact, they have turned themselves into pretzels trying to hate both men as bashing one inevitably helps the other. If I had to guess, conservative media hates Trump more than Cruz, but liberal media truly fears Trump.

As of this writing, all of the major media is giving this a good leaving alone. Part of it is they hate following the lead of the Enquirer. We saw this with every sex scandal since Gary Hart. But, sex scandals sell and eventually they have to cover it so they will dick around pretending to do their own reporting for a while to keep up appearances. There’s also a legal issue, in light of the Gawker verdict.

Then there is the fact that some of the principles are fixtures in political media. Amanda Carpenter is a gadfly who turns up on all the chat shows. She’s also been quite partisan in her support for Cruz. Her animosity toward Trump is off the chart. Another one of the Cruz women is a spokeschick for Fiorina. Another works for Trump and is on the chat shows ever day. Calling these women “Cruz Bimbos” is going to make for some uncomfortable moments.

That’s the real story here. These people all hang out with one another. A story like this reveals the truth of political media. It’s all a show. Two people spend a segment calling each other Hitler and then go out for drinks or more. Newt Gingrich called it Hollywood for ugly people and he was right. Nothing is on the level and everything is for sale. Both sides are just in it for the cash.

Katrina Pierson, one of the alleged bimbos, is a pretty good example of the sort of people in the chattering classes. She was an Obama supporter in 2008, but then joined the Tea Party in 2010. She worked for Ted Cruz when he was running for senate. Now she is working for Trump. She also has a habit of taking things that don’t belong to her.

Putting the politics aside, the hard part for the chattering classes is this story a truth about women in their business. All of these “strong, independent women” are chasing after the high status males like the stupid prol women they love to mock. Say what you want about Sarah Palin, her old man is not catting around on her and she controls the checkbook. Amanda Carpenter could learn a few things from Palin.

Of course, all of these women are full of it. One of the weird parts of politics is just how many women are there to snag a man. The adventuress is a fixture in Washington. They love the action, but they also love competing with other women for high status males, even the married ones, especially the married ones. There are normal women too, but the adventuress-to-normal is off the charts, compared to anywhere else.

One last bit from this that’s worth mentioning. Ted Cruz is what the man-o-sphere calls a “sigma male.” Like the alpha male, the sigma enjoys locking horns with other men and chasing women, but they prefer to operate on the fringe. Instead of climbing the status tree to be the top dog, they work solo and eschew building a following. They often go out of their way to piss of the establishment as a part of the strategy to score women.

This is a pattern we see with Cruz. Senators are famous for sticking together, but he has gone out of his way to piss in the cornflakes of his peers. Even when he was working for Bush he had a reputation for being a jerk to everyone. But, his bad boy rep helped him with the ladies. Now we can assume it is part of his seduction strategy. It is also the reason he will be dropping out the race sooner rather than later.

The End of Doyle

This is what national suicide looks like.

A man who tweeted about stopping a Muslim woman in the street yesterday, challenging her to “explain Brussels”, and lambasted on Twitter for his comments, has responded to the criticism today, insisting he is not some ‘far right merchant’.

Matthew Doyle, partner at a south London-based talent & PR agency, posted a tweet on Wednesday morning saying: “I confronted a Muslim woman in Croydon yesterday. I asked her to explain Brussels. She said ‘nothing to do with me’. A mealy mouthed reply.”

He was later arrested.

At some point, people figure out that posting a complaint on twitter is the same as punching someone in the face so they will start doing the latter. In fact, this man should have just punched the woman and walked away. The chances of him being arrested would have been lower. That’s how things are under an anarcho-tyranny. The cops only reach for the low hanging fruit.

His tweet referred to yesterday’s bomb attacks on the Belgian capital’s main airport and Metro system that left at least 34 people dead and 198 injured. His comment went viral, being retweeted hundreds of times before he eventually deleted it.

Mr Doyle told the Telegraph he had no idea his tweet would be the “hand grenade” it has proven to be – and that Twitter’s 140 character limit made the encounter sound vastly different to how he thought it went.

“What everyone’s got wrong about this is I didn’t confront the woman,” he said. “I just said: ‘Excuse me, can I ask what you thought about the incident in Brussels?'”

“She was white, and British, wearing a hijab – and she told me it was nothing to do with her.

“I said ‘thank you for explaining that’ – and her little boy said goodbye to me as we went out separate ways.”

On Wednesday afternoon, he says, someone who’s been outraged by his comments “turned up at my door, gave me a load of abuse and tried to throw a punch at me.”

This is predictable. When you start groveling, people naturally assume you will not fight back. Every guy who wants to signal his membership in the cult comes calling so they can take a poke at you, showing their coreligionists they are a true believer. It’s a low-cost act of public piety.

As for his more inflammatory tweets, Mr Doyle claims they’re intended as a joke, which people who know him would understand as “that’s absolutely not who I am.”

“I’m not some far-right merchant, I’m not a mouthpiece for any kind of racism or radicalism,” he says. “If I was xenophobic I wouldn’t live in London.

“I have a Muslim neighbour who got burgled, and I was one of the first people to go around to help.”

What this man is failing to grasp is he can never be forgiven for his crimes. No amount of groveling will get him off the hook. You see, all mass movements need bogeymen. They cannot exist without them. The suicide cult of multiculturalism can never forgive guys like this because he is their oxygen. He is the face of the thing against which they struggle. When the multi-cult starts forgiving the sinners, their movement is finished.

This is also why multiculturalism cannot exist in a free society. Inevitably, the people of Rotterdam notice that the swarthy fellows are raping a lot of white girls. The folks in Minneapolis notice that the Somali girls are disappearing. The people in Westphalia start to notice the migrant crime wave and the unwillingness of the police to go into those neighborhoods. Once people start noticing, they inevitable start saying it in public.

This forces the state to choose sides. The people who invited the problem into your neighborhood are certainly not going to take your side over the migrants, so men like Mr. Doyle get picked up by the police and humiliated in order to send a message. The next guy tempted to speak up will think to himself, “I have a family. I can’t end up like Doyle. Maybe I’ll just think of something else.”

Of course, this just emboldens the Muslims. They see it as weakness so they become even more provocative. In short order, another Doyle is on twitter complaining about some “Asian” men who harassed his wife and daughter at the train station. The police then pick up this new Doyle and we never see him again. The train station is now part of the Caliphate and the Doyles of the world steer clear of it.

As I keep pointing out, there’s always a reaction and we are seeing that all over as fringe candidates and parties begin to fill the void left by the legitimate candidates and parties. The fellas at Pegida or Soldiers of Odin will soon figure out that petitioning their rulers for redress is a waste of time. Instead, they will take up the tactics of the Mohammedan. After all, success breeds imitators. Burning down migrant centers will soon move to blowing up mosques.

It will not end well