Tuesday, October 17, 2017

- The Uber Way Back Machine

I've got just a few minutes, so I was skimming around over at Ace and saw this video for a 1983 English new wave band.

I was more into American music myself, but I remember a distant memory of that song playing in the background on the radio while I ravished some cheerleader, so for kicks I let the video play. And it reminded me of an aspect of the 80's which I'd previously forgotten.

We were all so unbelievably cynical back then. We all assumed the world would simply lose its spinning momentum to friction and eventually stop, burning the world on one side and freezing it on the other. I mean that in a sort of spiritual sense. The top down buttinsky politics of the Carter years had really done a job on us, and though Reagan was hopeful, we had yet to see any real upside from him. If you were the right age in 1985, the entire history of human existence looked to be a rubbery soled Thom McCann loafer gently nudging an unshaven face. As if they wanted us all to cower and fear them, but they didn't have the balls to actually oppress us.

It was more like they wanted us to figure a way to oppress ourselves.

I never imagined that we'd actually do just that.

The fact is, I didn't get any real optimism in my life until I made to to wall street 5 years later, and discovered just how much money there was to be made in being a global capitalist. For the first time in my life I thought it might be possible to make enough money to have a wife, some kids, maybe a dog. A real life. A life that would be worth it. A life that would be more than 10 minutes of joy with some half naked teenager, who didn't really care if I lived or died, so long as I waited until she got her panties back on to do it.

That national sentiment seems to be repeating itself now. My daughter is just as worried and cynical as I was back then only thanks to better parenting, she's thankfully without all the self destructive tendencies. Her friends are the same pretty much. As if they know for certain that they're never going to be free and happy. Kind of like that cheesy song.

Its funny how memory washes off all the filth, grime and misery leaving all the parts you loved or the parts you feared. That general sense of pointless malaise certainly washed away.

I remember the cheerleader pretty well... well... parts of her anyway. I remember her running into my bathroom wearing nothing but a pair of ankle sox and a naughty smile, when my buddy showed up at the door and let himself in. I remember having no responsibilities, and no real cares. That sounds like a pleasant thought but it truth, it wasn't. And I can recall that now that I've heard that crappy song. I can recall all my suppressed desperation and panic, that I'd never find a way to have a life that meant anything to anyone. Not even to myself.

Back then, nothing meant anything. These days, everything means something. All this considered, I really prefer it this way.

- Under A Feminist Sky

Remember when I said that according to Feminism Harvey Weinstein's only real sin was looking like a ball of used chewing gum rolled in cat hair? Well see if you can find anything in this piece that would be considered even close to 'sexual harassment' if Bob Weinstein looked like Ryan Gosling:

“ ‘No’ should be enough,” Segel told Variety. “After ‘no,’ anybody who has asked you out should just move on. Bob kept referring to me that he wanted to have a friendship. He didn’t want a friendship. He wanted more than that. My hope is that ‘no’ is enough from now on.”

“Bob Weinstein had dinner with Ms. Segel in LA in June 2016. He denies any claims that he behaved inappropriately at or after the dinner. It is most unfortunate that any such claim has been made,” the statement said.

He asked her out to dinner? That PIG! That Monster! What kind of perverted deviant would do that to a girl?

Obviously this is just one of the Hollywood 'mean girls' doing pile-on now that the business is in trouble. But the moral of this story is, if you're desireable enough there is no such thing as rape, and if you're unattractive enough, everything is rape.

Welcome to life under a Feminist Sky.

- Dr Doom Gets the Diversity Boot


To me, Marc Faber was a "one trick pony" but fun to listen to. He was one of several bears that predicted the 87 crash and other "black swan" events. Marc was always a pleasure during the Obama years as he was an outspoken contrarian. This time Marc went too far (speaking somewhat candidly and truthfully regarding racial issues).


What were those comments?
 In the latest edition of his 15-page investor letter, "The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report," Faber argued against the removal of confederate statues, saying the only crime of the men those monuments honored was to defend slavery and that the controversy distracts from more important debates, according to Bloomberg. There, inbetween quotes from George Orwell and historian Edward Gibbon and his opinions on universal basic income, Faber wrote the following:
"And thank God white people populated America, and not the blacks. Otherwise, the US would look like Zimbabwe, which it might look like one day anyway, but at least America enjoyed 200 years in the economic and political sun under a white majority." He then added that "I am not a racist, but the reality — no matter how politically incorrect — needs to be spelled out.

CNBC and FOX said he won't be invited back... I'm sure that goes for Bloomberg TV as well...


- Forgotten Title

I don't think much of Richard Spencer's political tactics. I'm told by men I respect that he's an amiable and intelligent guy, but I see no evidence of it from my distance.

With that said, this seems like total ridiculous overkill:

Florida Governor Rick Scott declares state of emergency ahead of white nationalist Richard Spencer's speech at the University of Florida

The trick there is in the reporting. The governor isn't declaring a state of emergency because of Richard Spencer, who is only going there to give a speech. He's not showing up to advocate violence or to burn the place to the ground. Whatever you may think of him, and I said 2 seconds ago, I personally don't think much, one guy saying unpopular things does not justify a 'state of emergency'. I strongly think my reaction to his speech (assuming it hits youtube eventually) is going to be "...yeah yeah Richard, blah blah blah".

Of course the issue isn't Richard, it's that the people who oppose him can't be relied upon to act like civilized rational humans. In that light, Governor Scott's reaction probably isn't quite so outlandish. I'd recommend he roll the paddy wagons right up to the barricades and the minute anyone from ANTIFA so much as twitches an eye, give them pepper spray in the face, a billy club across the skull, then it's bind, tie, lift, toss, and haul them away. Stuff the Gainesville jails to the rafters, and take your time in the processing. Charge them with Felonies, however contrived. Do to them what a state interested in protecting the citizenry really should do by running up the legal bill for George Soros.

Florida is an easy state for concealed carry. But that should do more to suppress Antifa violence than encourage it. Antifa losers are all afraid of guns, and with good cause. People that generally irresponsible should be anywhere near firearms. But the people they're 'protesting' will be armed. And they probably know it. So for all this fuss, it probably won't amount to much.

But my view remains the same. The moment a 'peaceful rally' turns into a riot, I strongly recommend that the Florida State Police suppress it with live ammo. Assembly? Sure. Protest? OK. Violence and rioting? Bang. That's always been my take on both left and right wing riots. And I see no reason to change based on politics. I'm so Busy today that I posted this title-less. Go figure. But it's been a fruitful day so, I have that to hang my hat on.

- The Managed Decline Of The Left

I was introduced to Rich Lowry at an event just a few weeks after "l'affaire de Derb". When he learned how I came to be there (through a relationship fostered by the afore mentioned hater) he gulped, looked at his shoes, and sheepishly tried not to get too ruffled. We spoke politely for a few minutes, then he excused himself to find less controversial conversation. The Derb issue never came up.

I mention this because more than most people at NR, I always got the impression that Lowry was worried about the bottom line, and the bottom line would obviously be affected by his actions. At some level he was worried about popularity, and on the right, that means the base. His writing since then seem to me to have shifted a bit more than the rest of the surrender caucus. I don't mean to say that if Derb wrote his infamous piece today things would have been different, I don't really know Lowy at all. But I think he'd have paused a bit longer to consider market forces at the very least.

This is why I even bothered to read this piece. But I see something there that maybe he doesn't. What I see is 'managed decline'.

I know what managed decline looks like because I've done it. In a shrinking market, good managers will focus on the highest ROI activities, and dispense with all others. This is clearly what is happening to late night comedy. They are trying their level best to maintain a larger share of a falling market, just like the best buggy whip manufacturers of today do. And their numbers relative to Carson reflect that.

I think it may be what Lowry is doing over at NR as well. Preemptive unconditional surrender to the left at all cost just doesn't command the high readership ground it once did. And though he hasn't gotten to the point of commanding Kevin Williamson and Jonah Goldberg to write more like Victor Davis Hanson, that may be around the corner for him. It could be that it's the strength of their writing and personalities that is keeping the whole endeavor afloat, leaving Lowry between a rock and a hard place. But his opinions seem to have shifted so much that I can only blame the influence of market forces.

In the end that will change minds so long as the mind's have an interest in it. Academia has only run off the rails because they didn't have to worry about market forces. The political writing arena has always seen itself as a blend between the world of Academia and the marketplace. One foot in each camp. When a man is going broke believing in something, facts have a way of wiggling into his world view. NR can only ignore the realities of Racial Politics and Feminism to the degree that they put all their weight on the former. given the state of Academia today, I think there are a few people who might be persuaded that it isn't such a terribly thing to be called a racist so long as you know it isn't true.

In truth, Feminism was always the harder sell because many men will believe anything if it will get them laid. But it's looking to me like Hurricane Harvey may have finally killed it, or is about to. I think it will decline as Hollywood does. And Hollywood is falling fast.

Anyway, much work to do. Something to keep in mind though.

- Banning Semi-Autos

This has been up for a few days but I've been busy.

Remember when I said that the regulators are dumber than the engineers, and that they have a choice between overly broad legislation that is easily shot down for being overbroad, or specific regulation that is easily circumvented by being too specific?

A new congressional proposal to ban bump stocks in the wake of the Las Vegas mass shooting would actually ban all semi-automatic rifles and parts.

OK. So while that bill wander around DC to it's inevitably death, the next step is for the supersmart 'expert' congressional staffers to get together and craft a new 'more specific' bill that speaks directly to bump stocks. But that bill won't include binary triggers, and it won't include 'draw stocks' or 'slide stocks' (or whatever they call them next when they move the spring from the back to the front or whatever else the engineers do).

Think carefully about the dreaded AWB that went through 'temporarily' at the Federal level and is still in place in California and New Jersey. I bought a perfectly legal AR15 and a perfectly legal AK47 while a resident of NJ. They function in all respects like any other AR15 and AK47, and even looked EXACTLY like an actual 'assault rifle' that could be purchased in other states.

Here is a photo of a well known hate filled, hating, hater using my AK while hunting black people for sport. Just look at the hate filled supremacy in his eyes! You can tell just by looking at him that's he's about to murder innocent undocumented children and puppies.

For those of you in the know, you'll also see that (apart from all the hate) the rifle he's holding features a single stack 10 round magazine, making it impossible to fit an armor piercing super deadly ultra assault, silencing, high capacity clip mag into it. And though you can't see it, it also features a nut welded onto the barrel threads which with it's non-adjustable stock, qualifies it for ownership under the NJ AWB.

My point is the same as always. The people in Government are mostly stupid. They will continue to do stupid things on this topic because what they're doing isn't designed to be smart, it's designed to make other stupid people feel better. But reality cannot be negotiated. And Whatever the creatures in Washington decide to do, the engineers who all live in the real world will easily circumvent the new rules. It's a pain, but survivable. And if we can get meaningful concessions from the left in other areas, (which I concede remains to be seen, or to my knowledge even attempted) they might even be worth it.

The unconditional surrender lobby may want to run ahead and 'just do something', but I trust the NRA to keep them from unfurling the new 'all white' American flag just yet. That's the flag that's all white, not America. Though maybe we should be accusing them of racism for trying? White Stripes and white stars on a white background is racism. All flags matter. Blah, blah, blah.

- More On Harvey Weinstein & Hollywood

You all call him a cuck, but to my pro-jew Alt-perspective he looks like (mostly) an ally. He's a traditionalist, like all orthodox jews. He believes in a more traditional role for women, and as such he's as harsh a critic of Feminism as any hood wearing klansman, even if he doesn't want to call it out by name. He's just a kid. I think he'll come around.

In this case (I don't follow him closely so I don't know his whole agenda) I think he's absolutely right. And since it's a religious issue for him I believe he's completely sincere in this critique. He mentions the transactional nature of sex under a Feminist sun. Well one thing he doesn't mention is that in Hollywood the reason successful women haven't spoken up is that the in the same way men use their power in a sexual transaction, women use their beauty. That beauty is their big bargaining chip and they don't want to give it up by denying themselves the chance to use it for advancement.

Emily Ratajkowski may think she has talent, but she 'knows' she has beauty. And she doesn't want to give up that advantage and be losing major roles to Mayim Bialik on talent alone. For women, good looks is a currency, and the trading floor is Hollywood. In exactly the same way that New York runs on sharp minds, Hollywood runs on good looks. And if sex stops being a transaction then being the 'fairest in the land' has lost some of it's value.

Maybe it's unfair for me to call out young Emily by name, I don't know if she sleeps around for roles. Maybe she's so striking that at her level it isn't required, and it's only the B list strivers who are forced to make sexual accommodations for Producers. I'm using her as an example only to make a broader point about women who are long on looks but maybe not quite so totally long on talent. But even if it doesn't apply to her personally, we can all be sure it does apply to many others just like her.

With that said, I think in this case we should be listening to Ben Shapiro on the Harvey Weinstein imbroglio.

Monday, October 16, 2017

- Threats Forcing Dana Loesch To Move

Funny, I don't think that word 'man' means what she thinks it means:

Loesch joined in on the trend, revealing how gun control advocate 'threatened to rape me to death'. Another man tracked her cellphone down and called her - telling her he planned to shoot her in her front yard, Loesch said. After the continued threats to her and her family's safety, Loesch says they decided to move.

I know that when it gets to a certain level, you have to start taking threats seriously. But I'm 100% certain that the person who was threatening to 'rape her to death' was some angry bitchy queen who couldn't get hard enough to rape Dana unless he was closing his eyes picturing David Hasselhoff. More than likely it was someone who wants to be referred to as Xe. The world has certainly become a dangerous place when people with such an obvious mental illness AREN'T marginalized.

Tweeting pictures of her house is pretty disturbing. And if you have kids, then you really do need to be more careful. So I guess she's doing the right thing. But If you're stupid enough to openly call her cell phone while the police are present in her home, then you probably aren't smart enough to mask your identity either. so hopefully the cops will take it as seriously as she is, and will track down this charming member of the party of tolerance, and throw them in the klink.

- Because He's So Ugly

The central tenet of third wave Feminism is that women are not only allowed but encouraged to engage in sexual acts whenever, however, and with whomever they wish, at absolutely any time, place, or venue. Though it usually goes unsaid, under Feminism men are discouraged from exercising any option or choice in the sexual marketplace, and all those choices should be the exclusive domain of women. Women are supposed to be the actors, while men are the objects acted upon.

Clearly no one asked men about this. And the poor fit of this philosophy to our natural instincts is best seen when examining the behavior of men. Some men 'act' whether women want them to or not. They reject advances from unattractive women, embrace them with attractive women, but offer no commitment to either since it is no longer required for sexual access. But men's actions go further than that.

The SNL joke that finally made the airwaves was that Harvey Weinstein "looks like a ball of used chewing gum rolled in cat hair". But women don't care about physical appearance as much as men. Harvey was, as the Z man accurately described it, "one of the gatekeepers" to a life of Fame and wealth that can come from success in the entertainment industry. He had a great deal of power, and power is an intense attractor for women.

It would always be better for the man to be good looking as well. If Harvey Weinstein was as physically attractive as someone like Elvis or Frank Sinatra was at their peak, he wouldn't have any issue right now. John F. Kennedy could have masturbated into every potted plant in NYC and he would have never been accused of any sexual impropriety because no woman ever would have complained. On the contrary, many third wave Feminists of a certain age would have probably rummaged through the topsoil to collect the potential for a Kennedy-esque offspring. Had third wave Feminism been the standard of the day in 1960, he could have slept his way from one coast to the other with impunity (some say he did anyway) and not a single objection would ever be offered.

By my personal standard as an antiquated 'sexist' where women and men are considered very different, it's no hypocrisy to see Harvey Weinstein's behavior as abhorrent, and I do. I think he's a monster and have no reason to defend him in any way. But my view is considered stupidly out of date by Feminists, and a product of 'hate' in 21st century America. I'm constantly accused by Feminists of 'trying oppress women' by denying them the choice to have sex with powerful men for their career's sake. But that is the traditionalist view, and by the standards of a heterosexual man, Harvey's behavior sets him out as the kind of creature that should be locked away in a small room, or publicly burned at the stake as a disincentive to others. If it were my daughter he treated that way it's exactly what would happen to him, and the law be damned.

But his behavior can only be seen as truly negative if you embrace some of the traditional differences between the sexes. If you're a third wave Feminist, you have no choice but to defend him because all women are entitled to the 'choice' to watch him shower. Even his worst acts must be defended because some women in some circumstances enjoy the feeling of being 'forced' to perform sex acts because it takes away the responsibility of choice. How do we know that the women accusing Harvey weren't women who felt titillation at that idea? 30 Rock featured a joke about Harvey's behavior where a character admitted to turning Harvey down only 3 of the 5 times he approached her. Of those last 2, who's to say it isn't what she really wanted all things considered?

In other words, under third wave Feminism what Harvey did is only wrong because he's so horribly ugly. By the standards of a society where women make all the choices about who has sex with who, that's his only real sin. To a man judging by the standards of men, that's no excuse for his behavior. But if he looked and sounded like JFK, no Feminist would be batting an eye at the things he's done.