Notes: My general plan is to get through some personal matters by the end of the year, then I hope I can record and write daily, both audiobooks, posts on this blog, and Lindercasts, dealing with topical matters and their timeless centers. My only social medium is Gab, where I'm nearing 1500 followers. I post a good amount of links and observations there; I encourage you to join if you have not. Its founder, Andrew Torba, #KidScrapple as I call him, since he's from Scranton, Pa., plans to do a ICO, and this may be 2018's Big Investment Opportunity. ... I will be doing as much as I can through the end of the year, but I will certainly be away for stretches, as earlier.
Roundup: This week in white... Big news was (main VNNForum thread:) Spencer speaking at U. of Florida, in Gainesville. Here is the full video (142m) of speech and press interactions. He was largely shouted down, but got off a good press conference with Mike Enoch, who was recently profiled in the New Yorker, which naturally tried to trace his dysmentsia to skin problems and allergies. The other big news was the discovery of teeth in a Rhine bank - they are most similar to teeth of Lucy of the Olduvai set, yet several million years older. So...Out Of Europe rather than Africa grows in strength. The right position is everything is tentative until much more is known. But OOA was never a scientific theory, it was always a political claim. "This changes everything we know" is the archaeologist's mantra. The problem is, he merrily revises his theory in light of the new bits he discovered, and happily ignores that they aren't the last piece of the puzzle, he will be doing the same routine again within two years. It's kind of funny from the outside. Maybe say: here's the fossil and other evidence we have. Here are some theories that might explain these data. And that's all we can say. Since we know, from history, there are plenty of shards left to be discovered. But that would be modest claims for modest evidence, and that aint the way science rolls these days. As I mocked...
Alex Linder · @Alex_Linder19 hours · editedi found an eighth of a spavril of the third chink of a lemur coccyx. this totally proves that pterodactyls were cultivating vast pomegranate orchards in Mycenastrum 32 million years agoReality and Reporting
#muhFoundses #muhChangesEverthing
Books burned in America? Innocent men stuck in camps? German-Americans in WWI, courtesy of Puddinhead Wilson and the "100% American" Anglo yahoos, the patriotards of their day. Great photos and story from Daily Mail, though it incorrectly puts the number of Americans of German descent at 100 million, practically the entire population of the USA at that time. Always remember and reread Mencken's classic essay on the Anglo-Saxon. In some ways an admirable white subset; in many other ways not. The Anglo/American can never be wrong. So if he is wrong, he can't correct it, which leads to the same mistake again. It is unthinkable in UK and USA that we helped the bad guys in WWII. Because that would make us bad guys too. And we can only be good guys. I mean, morality is our thing. We are christian civilization. That means what we do is civilized, and anyone opposed to us is a barbarian. We're too fragile and dishonest to see ourselves as the problem. That's just the cultural level we're stuck on. Communism came from jews. "Some call it communism, I call it Judaism," said the USA's #1 rabbi 1900-1950 period. Its initial iteration was in the Soviet Union, supposed to be the first eruption of a global revolution. (Unlike the Nazis, the judeo-bolsheviks really did intend a world revolution.) Jewish communists in the Soviet Union led the slaughter of 66,000,000 white christians, according to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. A force arose to fight the Judeo-SSR. Not in England. Not in America. In Germany. But jews in UK paid off Churchill's debts so he'd toe their line and initiate civilian bombing in Germany. In the USA, they attacked our wise advisers such as Charles Lindbergh who urged us to stay out of the affair. We shipped endless material to the USSR, jailed for sedition honest men and women who told the public what was going on. Then we jumped in and helped the white-mass-murdering jew-communists triumph. Since (((we))) won, we call ourselves the good guys. More and more whites now realize we're not. The guys who aid and save the bad guys are not the good guys. The guys who fight the bad guys are the good guys. But that is a little too much for the race of George Bush and Woodrow Wilson to compass.
Occam and Ad Hominem
Been thinking about this a lot lately. I believe Occam's Razor is the most important thought a human ever had. Its power is underrated. People, particularly whites, prefer fantasy to reality. So when we're all "love your race," we ought to begin by knowing our race. Not just its good side but its bad side. The bad side of our comparative racial creativity is our taste for delusion, for fantasy, for religion - for things that aint true but whimsically amuse our childish side that is the rich creamy nougat in far too many of us. The milder form of this, the daily form, is preferring elaborate explanations to simple ones. See the reaction to Vegas or any other mass shooting. But Occam was correct: the simplest explanation that covers the given facts is usually correct. It's certainly the place to start. Only go elaborate if you need to - because in the vast majority of cases, we don't. ... Then the thought I had this week was that Ad Hominem is always cited as a logical fallacy, yet it's essentially the Occam's Razor of motive-spotting. Nine times out of ten the reason a man says something traces back to his personal interests or some other private motivation. So the use of AH is logical - because it's the shortest route to the truth, in most cases. It might not be purely logical, but it's "street logical." It's akin to the "Norwegian Way," in the crab boat skipper's delightful (from the tv show): "There's a right way, a wrong way, and the Norwegian Way." Ad Hominem is the Norwegian way: looking for a personal motive is the way to understand someone's argument most of the time. And, I, for one, will continue to celebrate Occam and apply his Razor because he came up with the single most powerful, or at least useful, thought any human will ever have.
Thank you for writing, Alex.
ReplyDeleteMencken's essay contained some truth, and some calumny. Yes, the Anglo-Saxons tend to be braggarts & holier-than-thou assholes, but his blanket derision of the courage of at least our American ancestors went too far: the first settlers & the pioneer families actually faced foes with superior rates of fire, and the Confederates fought until the very end, when the entreaties of starving families compelled some soldiers to desert.
ReplyDeletePlus the essay makes it seem that he would be an open borders advocate. Why not let the Wretched Refuse in, when they're "superior"?