I read Takimag most days. I like Kathy Shaidle and Steve Sailer. Some of the other writers are OK and some are comically bad. They had some ridiculous twink named Fiske-Harrison write for them and I had a blast mocking the poor guy in the comments thread. I was not alone. The column was so silly it is hard to believe an adult wrote it. Fiske-Harrison is some rich guy’s kid so I assume Taki published his writing as a favor. That’s how rich guys roll, I’m told.

Anyway, I tried to post on Taki today and I see I have been banned. Given that they let Nazis comment on their stories, I’m at a loss as to what I could have done. I have not posted there is a long time. I say some outlandish things, but my goodness. They have a wife-beater as one of their featured writers. I’m pretty sure nothing I’ve posted comes anywhere close to that.

But, here I am, banned from another site. I blame racism. What else could it be?

Stop if you heard this one before. Stupid hippie chick is shocked to learn shit ain’t free – even from the government!

Ending insurance discrimination against the sick was a central goal of the nation’s health care overhaul, but leading patient groups say that promise is being undermined by new barriers from insurers.

First off, you cannot “insure” the sick. Insurance is a gamble. The customer buys a policy believing they will use more health services than they will pay in insurance premiums. The other side of the insurance bet is the insurance company. They are betting they will charge you more than you cost them over the life of the policy.

Otherwise, they lose money and go out of business. When you force them to insure people with known illnesses, they bake those known costs into the premium. If they cannot, then they find other ways to mitigate the costs, like not selling you a policy.

The insurance industry responds that critics are confusing legitimate cost-control with bias. Some state regulators, however, say there’s reason to be concerned about policies that shift costs to patients and narrow their choices of hospitals and doctors.

With open enrollment for 2015 three months away, the Obama administration is being pressed to enforce the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination provisions. Some regulations have been issued; others are pending after more than four years.

More than 300 patient advocacy groups recently wrote Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell to complain about some insurer tactics that “are highly discriminatory against patients with chronic health conditions and may … violate the (law’s) nondiscrimination provisions.”

Among the groups were the AIDS Institute, the American Lung Association, Easter Seals, the Epilepsy Foundation, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the National Kidney Foundation and United Cerebral Palsy. All supported the law.

Coverage of expensive drugs tops their concerns.

Sure it is. People like free shit. Men who spend their weekends in bathroom stalls with strange men, contracting an incurable disease, would love it if the rest of us had to pay for their treatments.

At the end of the piece we have this gem.

“People who have high cost health conditions are still having a problem accessing care,” said law professor Timothy Jost of Washington and Lee University in Virginia. “We are in the early stages of trying to figure out what the problems are, and to what extent they are based on insurance company discrimination, or inherent in the structure of the program.”

No, they have plenty of access to care. They are having trouble getting someone else to pay for it. It is why I call these people lunatics. When you believe you can defy the laws of nature, deny the realities of the physical world and force everyone to pretend your fantasies are reality, you are a lunatic.

These nuts truly believe their is an unlimited, inexhaustible supply of health care. The only reason everyone is not dipping their cup into the well of health care is the mean old health insurance companies are guarding it. That is madness. Worse yet, the madman who think it are in charge of the country and they are determined to bring the roof down on all of us.

I am a one percenter. By that I mean I have an IQ in the top 1%, according to the people who claim to know these things. I have a Mensa card and everything. Mensa is a two percent society, by the way. I joined only to prove a point. I mention it not to brag, but to Make it clear where I’m coming from on this. Unlike most people with an interest in IQ and HBD, I don’t think IQ is determinative on an individual basis. Often, it is as meaningless as eye color in how a person turns out. Other factors like sanity, focus, ambition, dumb luck and circumstance count for a lot more than raw IQ.

One of my obsessions is belief and why people believe the things they believe, often in the face of evidence to the contrary. This post on Unz the other day got me thinking about it. Noam Chomsky was a great linguist. I use the past tense as no one in the field pays any attention to him anymore. There’s also some question as to whether he was all that brilliant when people did pay attention to him. That’s not why they stopped listening to him. The reason people stopped listening to him is he is a nut.

Chomsky is a Stalinist, or at least he was a Stalinist. His article is mostly an apologia for the Soviets and their conduct during the Cold War, The rest is an indictment of US foreign policy. Like every other old Red, Chomsky is a reactionary. Anything against Soviet communism must be evil. Everything else flows from it. The fact that he can excuse the mass murder committed by the Soviets is just another example of the man’s madness. Chomsky is a brilliant lunatic.

It is easy to excuse it because of the politics. The madness of the progressive faith has excused a lot of monstrous things so it is easy to blame one for the other. We’ve all known very nice people who go off the rails as soon as the discussion turns to the political. My former attorney was a great lawyer and a brilliant guy until you mentioned Republicans.

But, smart people often believe in crazy stuff. Rick Rosner is a good example. The guy may be the smartest man on earth. He has had a nice career in TV, but nothing a guy with an average IQ could not achieve. Rick also believes in magic fairy dust and living forever. All of those supplements he takes are junk. That whole racket is exactly that, a racket. Most of the stuff you can buy at GNC is just filler material with no health benefits whatsoever.

He’s not alone in the wacky supplement/live forever club. Ray Kurzweil is another brilliant guy sucking down hundreds of pills a day in the belief he will live forever. I don’t think there’s much reason to doubt that Kerweil is a brilliant guy and a wildly successful guy. He’s also as mad as a hatter. He may think popping 150 pills keeps him young, but he looks old to me.

I’ve always thought IQ testing is popular because it is possible. We can create puzzles to test people’s problem solving skills that control for education, language and culture. Problem solving and pattern matching are important skills, but not the only skills. In many areas of life, those skills are not very important. Politics and government are two obvious examples.

It’s hard to measure things like social awareness, charisma, guile and scheming. The Big Five Personality tests seem to do a decent job measuring some of this, but I can make the results come out anyway I like with a little focus. I did this one as if I was Obama and then I did it pretending to be what I imagined TR would be like. I nailed TR and was Carter the first time when I did Obama. I did the test a third time and nailed Obama.

You can’t game IQ tests that way. The crappier ones are easy to fool, but that’s true of all inferior products. The Big Five tests have a lot of study and brainpower behind them and they are not good for much of anything, other than discussing third parties. That’s why I suspect psychometricians are drawn to IQ. If you can measure something it must be important. That’s the logic, leastways.

The funny thing about this topic is people have known all of this for a very long time. It is why morality has always been so important to human societies. A moral person is not a threat, even if they are not the smartest guy in the room. An average IQ president who has a sound belief system is going to cause less mischief than a super-smart guy who is a moral nullity. Clinton is a great example of the latter.

Gateway Pundit asks, “Is the media trying to get Ferguson police office Darren Wilson lynched?”

The answer is yes. They are hoping a mob of angry black people burn the man’s house down with him and his family in it. Maybe a Reginald Denny style beating so they can get some good video. The reason is two-fold. One is they know it makes good television. We get to see angry black people going nuts on TV all the time. Seeing a white guy getting the business from a sympathetic mob is a ratings bonanza.

Then there is the fact the Left hates normal white people. They assume that normal white people love the cops. They also assume that it is still 1968, the imaginary 1968 where blacks were beaten on a daily basis by the cops. That’s why they are trying really hard to lead the mob of angry black people to the home of the cop. They want to see some mayhem, which is pretty much all the Left offers these days.

The legacy of slavery is primarily a two digit IQ. At least that seems to be the case here.

Supporters of Mireille Miller-Young cite the “cultural legacy of slavery” and even the effects of pregnancy to explain why the feminist studies professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara would accost a teenager spreading a pro-life message on campus.

The pregnant 38-year-old who pleaded no contest to misdemeanor counts of theft, vandalism and battery after stealing and destroying an anti-abortion poster and injuring a a16-year-old activist, says she’s sorry for some of her actions and hopes to “makes amends through community service.”

An associate professor whose course work, which includes pornography and sex work, has gained her the nickname the “porn professor,” Ms. Miller-Young was set to appear for sentencing today (August 14) before Judge Brian Hill in Santa Barbara County Superior Court.

Think about that for a second. A university in a first world country employs someone to teach pornography and sex work. In fact they have a whole department for it.

But the hearing got moved to another courtroom before being rescheduled, perhaps Friday.

The News-Press obtained Ms. Miller-Young’s apology letter, which was part of a package of letters of support prepared by defense attorney Catherine Swysen, aimed at getting the lightest possible sentence for her client.

Three months pregnant at the time of the March incident, a portion of which was recorded on a cellphone camera, Ms. Miller-Young states, “I wish to apologize for my actions … The Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust group had a perfect right to come to UC Santa Barbara to express their views about women’s reproductive rights.”

“As much as the images they displayed were offensive and distressing to my students, and to me, I had no right to take their poster or destroy it,” she writes.

But the letter says nothing about the battery charge, which stemmed from Ms. Miller-Young scratching teenage activist Thrin Short.

Thrin’s 21-year-old sister, Joan Short, who also participated in the demonstration, isn’t buying the apology, telling the News-Press exclusively today, “I guess I would like to see her say to her students, ‘I did a really stupid thing. You shouldn’t follow my example.’ ”

In the video, posted online by Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, Thrin pleads with the associate professor to return the sign, at one point calling her a thief.

“I may be a thief,” a smiling Ms. Miller-Young replies, “but you’re a terrorist.”

She told UCSB Police that she was pregnant at the time and was “triggered” by the graphic images of abortion on the poster.

After initially pleading not guilty, she changed her mind and in July entered pleas of no contest.

Support letters submitted by defense attorney Catherine Swysen and obtained by the News-Press laud the respect and admiration Ms. Miller-Young has among her peers as well as her generosity when it comes to students.

Some of the letters were written on UCSB letterhead, presumably on university equipment and university time. Among them is one from history professor Paul Spikard, who states that his colleague is the object of “an energetic smear campaign that seems to have little to do with her person or her actions, and a great deal to do with fomenting racial hatred and rallying right-wing political sentiment.”

“It would be tragic if Dr. Miller-Young were sentenced to jail time or mandatory anger management classes based on the press’ portrayal of her as an Angry Black Woman.”

He cites no reports or stories to back up the claim.

Another letter of support, also on UCSB letterhead, comes from Eileen Boris, a professor in the Department of Feminist Studies.

Prof. Boris seeks clemency for her colleague, stating, “she was at the stage of a pregnancy when one is not fully one’s self fully, so the image of a severed fetus appeared threatening.”

“If she appears smiling on camera,” Prof. Boris continues, “she is ‘wearing the mask,’ that is, she is hiding her actual state through a strategy of self-presentation that is a cultural legacy of slavery.”

Pat Hardy, a member of Santa Barbara Friends Meeting (the Quakers) and president of a group called Alternatives to Violence Project California, urges Judge Hill to consider AVP’s conflict resolution workshops as part of Ms. Miller-Young’s punishment.

“These workshops are offered both in the community as well as 19 prisons throughout the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.”

Ms. Hardy says workshops in Santa Barbara are being offered “to gang members and at-risk youth as well as a widely diverse group of adults.”

“I urge you to look beyond the recent act,” she writes to Judge Hill, “to explore the opportunity for (Ms. Miller-Young) to make a change by exploring the world of non-violence within this setting.”

Joan Short said any punishment that doesn’t include some sort of broader apology to students, not just for stealing the poster but also for the physical nature of the confrontation, does not go far enough.

“Before, some of the things she was saying was, ‘I had a right to do this. I set a good example for my students. I was showing them how to protect themselves,’ ” Joan said.

“I think she should publicly say to her students, ‘I acted completely inappropriately.’ ”

If you look at the collection of crotch warriors in the link to the UCSB Crotch Studies Department, you won’t find anyone who majored in math or physics. As far as I can tell, there are no “right answer” studies in there. By “right answer” I mean the use of axioms and agreed upon facts. In math, everyone agrees on basic addition and cardinal numbers, for example. A “proof” is or is not correct and everyone agrees on it. In crotch studies, everyone has their own facts, most of which are imaginary.

This is why we have a trillion dollar student debt problem. A big chunk of that debt finances crotch studies programs. There’s zero demand for these courses offered by nitwits like Miller-Young. Students are forced into these courses to justify spending tax dollars on what is a collection of hens bitching about their vagina. Scan through the typical state university catalog and you find more worthless courses than useful ones. That’s being generous.

But, that’s life in a social democracy. The game is about shifting costs onto others through manipulation of the system. These broads are making lavish salaries by gaming the higher ed system. An army of worthless administrators fill up offices pushing paper around like African bureaucrats. The bill for all of it ends up in the hands of the dwindling number of people pulling the cart.

I’m fond of saying that the pod people who have colonized my country are members of a suicide cult. It’s not just that they will destroy that which contradicts their beliefs. That’s certainly part of it. In that regard they are like ISIS or the Taliban. To this type of fanatic, these alternatives cannot exist, otherwise their own identity must be false. Therefore, they are required to destroy all traces of these heretics and infidels. Razib Khan does a great job explaining this with regards to the current situation in Iraq.

Progressives are not just obsessed with destroying competitors. They seem determined to pull down the pillars of civilization. Their destruction of the America health insurance system is a great example. There’s no reason to explain the mayhem they are causing, other than a desire to destroy. It is possible that it is just gross incompetence, but it sure looks deliberate. This piece in IBD the other day is a good example. All of these results were predicted and avoidable. Yet, here we are.

Another example is the continued assault on the STEM fields. I saw this in my Twitter feed.

Tracy Van Houten has always been infatuated with space. Over the course of two decades and two degrees, that love took Houten from a pre-engineering class in high school to NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, where she works as an aerospace systems engineer on groundbreaking projects like the Mars Curiosity Rover.

Like many female engineers, though, the 32-year-old mother of two has encountered challenges one might expect in a field where nearly 90% of professionals are men. Colleagues have occasionally asked Van Houten — sometimes the only woman in the room — to take notes during meetings and plan work parties. At times she feels her ideas aren’t acknowledged or heard.

Van Houten must also make difficult choices in order to juggle work and family — a balance male engineers may not feel as compelled to achieve. When her second child was a year old, she turned down the opportunity to join a team operating Curiosity once it landed on Mars, because of the grueling schedule.

A common assertion from feminists is that women have to make choices that men do not face. There’s never a mention of the reverse. Men certainly face choices women do not face. Both are a product of biological reality, but determined to be a social construct, because, well, vagina.

Yet, Van Houten remains a dedicated engineer, and that’s not always common according to a new survey. For the past several years, two researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee have surveyed 5,300 women with degrees in engineering. They found that females frequently leave the profession because there aren’t enough opportunities for career advancement, or because they need to fulfill parenting or caregiving responsibilities in the absence of family-friendly work practices and policies.

The research indicates that leaning in to an engineering career may not lead to leadership prospects or a lifelong vocation, as women may hope. Instead, these women find themselves working for unfriendly or even hostile supervisors who show little interest in helping them advance professionally or designing a flexible work schedule to accommodate family obligations. The survey respondents also reported being discouraged by antiquated attitudes expressed by male colleagues and feeling isolated in a “male-centric” workplace.

I love how men are supposed to accommodate women by “helping them advance professionally.” Maybe that’s good business. Maybe it is something a smart business owner should do. I don’t know. What this is, however, is a childish demand by girls unprepared for the real world. Suck it up toots.

Women, in fact, comprise about 20% of engineering school graduates, but only 11% of practicing engineers are female. In Fouad’s survey, a third of the women who left the field in the past five years did so to take care of children at home. Twelve percent reported a dearth of opportunities to advance in their career.

To a sane person, this seems pretty normal. Engineering, for example, is not sales. The value of an engineer is cumulative. A woman who leaves her job for five years to raise kids is coming back to work not just having missed five years of working. She is now behind the college grads in many cases. Her peers have advanced to supervisory positions. Odds are, the mom returning to work has better options outside of engineering. The same is probably true of all STEM fields.

To help both employees and their employers address these problems, SWE recently published a “playbook” that offers suggestions on how to better integrate work and personal commitments. Among the recommended policies are flexible scheduling practices, maternity and adoption leave, and on-site health and wellness resources.

Fouad, along with Bierman, believes that companies must start evaluating their policies for both sexes in order to effectively change attitudes in the workplace. As more men feel comfortable insisting on a sensible schedule, such requests will become the norm and not just the domain of female employees. Similarly, as more women view engineering as field that accommodates and encourages all of its professionals, they may increasingly join its ranks.

It’s not hard to see where this is going. The diversity rackets started the same way. First they sent out “helpful” play books. Then they sent out letters reading, “Nice company you have there. Too bad is something were to happen to it.” Not long after, the HR departments were flooded with women and minorities running diversity clinics. Jesse Jackson is out shaking down Silicon Valley. The more subtle types will be demanding engineering and technology firms start hiring girls – or else.

Put another way, it is convert, or else.

I’ve been following this case for a while and I keep wondering why no one is in jail. There’s little doubt that major figures in tech were engaged in illegal activity. It is also clear, by the way, that their lust for H1B1 visas is just an attempt to suppress wages.

There is “ample evidence” that Silicon Valley was engaged in “an overarching conspiracy” against its own employees, a federal judge said on Friday, and it should either pay dearly or have its secrets exposed at trial.

Judge Lucy H. Koh of the United States District Court in San Jose rejected as insufficient a proposed $324 million settlement in a class-action antitrust case that accused leading tech companies of agreeing not to poach one another’s engineers.

In addition, her decision immediately resuscitated a public relations nightmare for Google, Apple and other top tech companies while vindicating a range of observers — including one of the plaintiffs in the suit — who said Silicon Valley was escaping justice.

With the case once again heading to trial, it threatens to expose to further scrutiny the business practices of Steve Jobs of Apple. The blunt emails of Mr. Jobs, an unquestioned genius, could prove to be his company’s undoing.

Steve Jobs was a horrible human being. If the Christians are right, Steve Jobs is being sodomized by Hitler and Stalin in Hell right now. He screwed his employees, treated everyone including his family like garbage and he was a pathological liar and confidence man. Maybe that finally gets a full airing in a courtroom. Too bad the cocksucker is dead.

Steve Sailer often makes the point that the Democrat coalition is held together by a transcendent hatred of white males. Women, blacks, Hispanics and the six gay guys who bother to vote have one thing in common and that is they think the pale penis people need to be taught a lesson. Specifically:

Another aspect to consider is the inherent fractiousness of the Democrats’ Coalition of the Fringes: the lesbian-feminists are mad at the suddenly all-important she-males, the Muslims are mad at the Jews over the Middle East, the Asians are mad at the Hispanics over U. of California quotas, the NAMs are mad at the SWPLs for gentrifying them out to the sticks, Hollywood is worried that soon they’ll have to release statistics about their lack of diversity just like Silicon Valley has had too, and so forth and so on.

How can this coalition be kept together? Simple. By getting all the Fringes to unite in hating straight cis-gendered Christian old white uncool men (add as many qualifying adjectives as needed).

The question is whether it can hold together. Charles Murray thinks it will blow apart and the result will be a tribal culture of some sort. What that is. exactly, is debatable. This story from The Hill tells me it is coming at us quickly.

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) on Monday accused Democrats of engaging in a “war on whites” in the current immigration debate.

On conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show, Brooks dismissed the idea that the more conservative GOP bloc’s position on immigration is hurting his own party.

“This is a part of the war on whites that’s being launched by the Democratic Party. And the way in which they’re launching this war is by claiming that whites hate everybody else,” he said during the interview. “It’s a part of the strategy that Barack Obama implemented in 2008, continued in 2012, where he divides us all on race, on sex, greed, envy, class warfare, all those kinds of things. Well that’s not true.”

I have no idea who this guy is or how he is perceived. My bet is he gets written off as a nut. Still, a sitting Congressman talking like this is a big deal. It has been decades since anyone in the political class has been willing to say anything about race outside of the old chestnuts approved by our cultural masters.

On “Fox News Sunday,” National Journal’s editorial director, Ron Fournier, suggested the Hispanic community is becoming increasingly disenchanted with Republicans.

“This party, your party, cannot be the party of the future beyond November if you’re seen as the party of white people,” said Fournier, whom Ingraham described as being part of the “lame-stream media.”

I keep wondering if these experts are crazy, stupid or just pathological. Hispanics are not a big part of the vote. They tend not to vote in general and they have never voted in big numbers for Republicans. As a practical matter, the GOP is wise to limit the influx of Hispanics. That’s good politics and smart politics. Yet, experts keep yapping about the need for Republicans to chase Hispanic votes.

Brooks said recent polls indicate every demographic group agrees that the rule of law should be enforced and border security must be improved.

“It doesn’t make any difference if you’re a white American, a black American, a Hispanic-American, an Asian-American or if you’re a woman or a man. Every single demographic group is hurt by falling wages and lost jobs,” Brooks said.

All of the polling also shows that Hispanics are not fond with illegal immigration and favor cutting back on legal immigration. They suffer from none of the madness that has gripped the political class. They know what mass immigration means for them and they are not enthusiastic about recreating Tijuana in their new homeland.

“Democrats, they have to demagogue on this and try and turn it into a racial issue, which is an emotional issue, rather than a thoughtful issue,” he added. “If it becomes a thoughtful issue, then we win and we win big. And they lose and they lose big. ”

Brooks accused Democrats of playing a “political game” and Ingraham said they’re “playing the race card.”

This is the first time I think I’ve heard a GOP official take this approach. I have never understood why the GOP tries to do battle with the Left on their terms. Immigration should be as exciting as zoning issues. How many do we want and how do we process them? That’s it.

But, it strikes me as being way too late in the day for any of it to matter. The future is going to be very unpleasant.

Way back in the olden thymes, I hired a homosexual. Of course, this was the olden thymes so there was no mention of it. If anyone discovered a homosexual, they were required to report them to the authorities. The homosexual was then shipped off to one of the rehabilitation centers run by Pat Robertson. If that did not “take” then they were shipped to the lavender plantations in the South operated by Oral Roberts, ironically enough. As a result no one ever spoke of homosexuals in public or private. The subject was banned.

Ok, that’s nonsense, but not too far from the official narrative being developed by the usual suspects. The airbrushing of history with regards to this topic is not going to end until the past fits the fantasy. Anyway, in my case the guy was flaming, so it was obvious he preferred the company of men. That and he mentioned it in his interview. He wanted to make sure it was not going to be an issue. I told him he’d have to figure that out for himself, but as long as he did his job he’d have no issue with me.

That was the last time I had any reason to discuss the matter with him. Some of the guys gave him grief, but he was used to it and handled it without help from me. As is always the case, he fell into a role that suited him and everyone else. The point being that in the olden thymes, homosexuals had to put up with some mild inconveniences, but nothing significant. More important, normal people did not go crazy around them. Other than some mild discomfort, normal people got along just fine with homosexuals in their ranks. We were indifferent towards them.

Today, people all over the world are going insane over homosexuals. Throughout the Middle East and Africa, otherwise normal people are going berserk and attacking homosexuals. Uganda, for example, just passed harsh laws against homosexuality. They did it despite stern warnings from Obama, so you know they must have gone mad. Of course, we all know how countries in the Middle East have gone bonkers over this. Iran was driven to such madness as to bring back stoning.

OK, I’m kidding around again.

Sort of.

I wanted to check in on the sports world and I see this on ESPN. David Tyree is against gay marriage, like most everyone. Big deal. Why is this sports story? Every damned week the sporting press is running with a homosexual story. You just know they will make a fetish of Michael Sam this fall. They made fools of themselves hounding the gay basketball player last summer so you know they will go crazy over the football player. ESPN is the worst offender, but even sports radio can’t stop obsessing over the gays. There’s nowhere to hide from the constant chatter about homosexuals.

I’m all fagged out.

I want the love that dared not speak its name to go back to not speaking its name. Now it is the love that won’t shut the fuck up. You can’t escape it. If you watch TV, every show now must feature a homosexual, despite the fact only 3.4% of the population claim to be homosexual. There are more “little people” in this world than “trans” people, yet every newspaper in the country is running at least one tranny tale a week. If I were a midget, I’d feel like I was getting the short end…well…nevermind.

It is getting to the point where it is impossible to engage with popular culture. The preaching is unbearable. Preaching about homosexuals is even worse, given that no one, including most homosexuals, cares about homosexuals. Circling back (or reaching around if you prefer) to my story at the top, I remember a time when no one cared about the topic and they were generally decent enough to keep their feelings about it to themselves. Let’s go back to that.

But, that’s not how cultural genocide works. The lunatics give you two choices. One is you embrace their insane, ever shifting set of codes, or, else. ISIS is telling Iraqi Christians they must convert or die. The Greater American Lunatic is telling normals they must embrace and exult homosexuality or else. Well, nuts to that, as it were. I’ve had enough of the gays. I’m all fagged out and I don’t want to hear any more about  the gays.

Imagine a group of people that deeply believe in the Great Pumpkin. So much so, they have not only developed a religion and culture around it, everything that defines them is based in the existence of the Great Pumpkin. Their culture and social structures would collapse if they discovered the Great Pumpkin was myth. The news is full of examples of people who would die for their religion so this should not be a terribly difficult thought experiment.

Now, flip around the other way. Imagine a group of people that have based everything about their existence on the belief that the Great Pumpkin does not exist. Unlike atheists, these people have actually managed to build a viable culture and institutions around the absolute faith in the Great Pumpkin being a myth. Everything they are is based on it. Tolerance for any Great Pumpkin-ism is impossible because it is essentially a denial of their essence.

Now, let’s assume these people know of one another and are within travel distance of one another. The former group, let’s call them the Positives, are going to be hell bent on converting the latter group, that we’ll call the Negatives. On the other hand, the Negatives are not interested in converting the Positives. The mere fact that these people are able to tolerate Great Pumpkin belief means they are capable of denying everything that makes up the very being of a Negative. Therefore, they want to destroy the Positives.

Now, replace the Great Pumpkin with race.

That’s where things stand in America when it comes to race. Most people accept that race is a real thing and different people come from different parts of the world. For most people, it is a casual awareness that does not animate their life beyond the fringes. By that I mean, they think about it when they see a sign for Martin Luther King Boulevard or a bunch of a Spanish guys hanging out on the corner. Others take it more seriously as an academic or intellectual pursuit, while others just like wearing white and burning crosses.

The other side of the fence we find the race deniers. Everything they believe, their sense of self and their world view, is based on race being a myth. The trouble is they are facing a mountain of scientific evidence that contradicts their belief. The mountain is not only growing, it is growing rapidly. Studies like this one seem benign to normal people, but they are a stake through the heart of a race denier.

Economists at the University’s Centre for Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE) have looked at why certain countries top the world happiness rankings. In particular they have found the closer a nation is to the genetic makeup of Denmark, the happier that country is. The research could help to solve the puzzle of why a country like Denmark so regularly tops the world happiness rankings.

Dr Eugenio Proto and Professor Andrew Oswald, based in the Department of Economics, found three forms of evidence for a link between genetic makeup and a nation’s happiness.

Firstly they used data on 131 countries from a number of international surveys including the Gallup World Poll, World Value Survey and the European Quality of Life Surveys. The researchers linked cross-national data on genetic distance and well-being.

Dr Proto said: “The results were surprising, we found that the greater a nation’s genetic distance from Denmark, the lower the reported wellbeing of that nation. Our research adjusts for many other influences including Gross Domestic Product, culture, religion and the strength of the welfare state and geography.

The second form of evidence looked at existing research suggesting an association between mental wellbeing and a mutation of the gene that influences the reuptake of serotonin, which is believed to be linked to human mood.

Dr Proto added: “We looked at existing research which suggested that the long and short variants of this gene are correlated with different probabilities of clinical depression, although this link is still highly debated. The short version has been associated with higher scores on neuroticism and lower life satisfaction. Intriguingly, among the 30 nations included in the study, it is Denmark and the Netherlands that appear to have the lowest percentage of people with this short version.”

The final form of evidence looked at whether the link between genetics and happiness also held true across generations, continents and the Atlantic Ocean.

Professor Oswald said: “We used data on the reported wellbeing of Americans and then looked at which part of the world their ancestors had come from. The evidence revealed that there is an unexplained positive correlation between the happiness today of some nations and the observed happiness of Americans whose ancestors came from these nations, even after controlling for personal income and religion.”

For the race deniers, this is like seeing the Great Pumpkin walking down Main Street. This is not a correlation teased out of data one can dismiss. You have hard genetic science. More important, if a small localized population of humans in the heart of Europe can have some weird genetics that manifest in personality and culture, groups walled off from Europe my oceans and mountains are going to have even more unusual mutations.

The race deniers will be undone by the fact Denmark is full of Danes.