Monday, March 18, 2013

'Being White in Philly' & Appropriately Named Mayor Nutter


Mayor complains to Human Rights Commission about "Being White in Philly" article

POSTED: Friday, March 15, 2013, 5:45 PM

Google Images
Controversy over that problematic Philadelphia magazine March cover story called “Being White in Philly” continues to simmer. In the latest development, Mayor Michael Nutter has sent a letter to the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations decrying the “disgusting” tone of the piece and accusing the magazine of having “sunk to a new low even for a publication that has long pretended that its suburban readers were the only citizens civically engaged and socially active in the Philadelphia area.”  In the piece, based on anonymous interviews, Robert Huber makes the claim that white people are afraid to talk about race for fear of being called racist.  
“That the magazine thought a collection of these despicable, over-generalized, mostly anonymous assumptions rose to the level of journalism is unfortunate enough,” the mayor wrote. “Worse, some of the residents of the nation’s fifth-largest city who are quoted in the piece seem to have ignored every positive anecdote they might otherwise have shared about a positive experience with African-Americans in favor of negative stories, many of them not even clearly attributable to African-Americans at all, to allow the author to feed his own misguided perception of African-Americans – notwithstanding his own acknowledged daily experiences on his own block – as an ethnic group that, in its entirety, is lazy, shiftless, irresponsible, and largely criminal.”
Nutter asked that the Human Relations Commission “consider specifically whether Philadelphia magazine and the writer, Bob Huber are appropriate for rebuke by the Commission in light of the potentially inflammatory effect and the reckless endangerment to Philadelphia’s racial relations possibly caused by the essay’s unsubstantiated assertions.” ...
     Hilariously, it doesn't seem to occur to Mayor Nutter that his reaction to the article 'Being White in Philly' confirms 100 percent of what the writer and others were saying about how in Philly, and of course, by extension, across the entire [dis]United States, whites are sensibly afraid to speak honestly about race, without causing some sort of uproar or possibly being punished, even if only socially, which is one of the punishments many people understandably fear the most. It also exposes as a lie that big dramatic statement intoned by AG Holder shortly after Obama took office, that we are a "nation of cowards" because we are afraid to discuss race. 
     Because obviously the last thing that the people holding power in the race industry, like Holder and Nutter, want is an actual honest discussion about race that might involve legitimate, to say the least, concerns that whites may have--like, oh gosh, I don't know, about their own and their kid's personal safety. They want a PC-scripted discussion, like the ones in all those government and industry 'sensitivity training sessions,' which are about as honest and freewheeling as the ones that the Maoists used to have with each other, after which they would finally conclude that they just needed to become even better, more loyal Maoists.
     And you have to get a kick out of the mayor's criticism of the writer having interviewed people who were quoted only anonymously, since the interviewer was talking to such individuals as had, for example, experienced a violent black drug gang across their street. Allowing their names for publication would have meant their having a death wish--apparently no problem for the Nutter. (Hmm, ever notice how such attitudes against whites are never considered 'hate'?) 
     This leads to the obvious conclusion, that Mayor Nutter is little better than a thug himself.  Think of it. He learns of the fear that many whites are living under--one interviewee happened to be wearing a pair of bent out of shape eye glasses, because he had recently been beaten by a black robber. And yet notice the complete lack of compassion or any feeling of the slightest responsibility on the part of the mayor. It isn't: This is terrible, I vow to make my city a safer place for my constituents! No, it is: attack the messenger. 
     Obviously, the last thing that those who have scampered to the top of the race-grievance industry want is to have any honest discussion about race, because the actual truth, that races are inherently different, that whites are not always inferior in such comparisons, and that different races will always be incompatible living cheek to jowl, must be constantly hidden, hidden and hidden again. Instead we are endlessly commanded to 'Celebrate diversity!' and the wonderful fact that we as whites will continue to exist in ever shrinking numbers. You are so right, Mayor Nutter, who would have ever thought that our grandkids' grandkids going out of existence could be so much fun?! 
       

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Connection between Open Borders & Peacock Tails?

Giving away the farm. Why?

Occidental Observer, March 17, 2013


Google Images
A frequent preoccupation of our ilk (TOO) is why Europeans and N. Americans of Euro stock have so easily allowed Europe and N. America to be invaded by so many immigrants from around the world.  After all, it’s not as though they first sent armies to conquer us, à la Genghis Khan. The Indians were over-run, too, but they lacked firepower if not the desire to defend their territories. We have had plenty of firepower but little desire to protect our interests. Why?
An interesting take on the matter may reside in the 2000 book by Geoffrey Miller, The Mating Mind, the relevance of which, for our purposes, will take several steps to show. The book is an exceedingly entertaining and amusing analysis of many features of human and other animals’ behavior from the standpoint of “sexual selection.”  Charles Darwin discussed this extensively and Miller provides a grand opportunity for practicing “selection thinking” in that regard. Males choose females and females choose males for reproduction. What they choose is what gets reproduced, at least if it’s genetically influenced. The peacock’s tail is the classic example. It’s very costly to grow and it’s a handicap in defending against predators. But they grow them anyway because peahens found them attractive (for unknown reasons locked in their little heads, i.e., some sort of “sensory bias”). The more peahens liked them, the more males were “selected” for growing them, and the more peahens were “selected” for liking them — since their daughters would be best off being attracted to the most successful males, i.e., those with the “best tails.” As long as the sexual reproductive advantages outweighed the costs of big tails, there would have been a sort of “runaway” selection for big tails.
While the selection could be just an arbitrary result of a quirky sensory bias, a less surprising basis for sexual selection is “fitness indication,” a cue for especially good health and reproductive capacity. What males often find attractive in a female can be seen as an indication of her good health and ability to bear healthy children. But a “handicap” can function as a “fitness indicator” by, in effect, demonstrating that if the male peacock can afford to have such a big tail, he must be really something!
Now then, what do humans value in a mate? Personality traits are important and Miller is convinced that human “morality”, related as it seems to be to personality, is
a direct result of  sexual selection. We have the capacity for moral behavior and moral judgments today because our ancestors favored sexual partners who were kind, generous, helpful, and fair. We still have the same preferences. David Buss’s study of global sexual preferences found that ‘kindness’ was the single most important feature desired in a sexual partner by both men and women in every one of the 37 cultures he studied. It ranked above intelligence, above beauty, and above status. (p. 292)
Well, if a potential sexual partner wants kindness, one had bloody well better demonstrate kindness. How? By being kind to her/him. But also demonstrating kindness in all sorts of other situations, including situations that indicate a trait that is not just manifested when one wants to get someone into bed. Charity! Showing sympathy for the poor and the down-trodden! Supporting their immigration to the West to escape their economic and political situation. And of course the more one genuinely, unconsciously, feels sympathy, the more convincing is one’s demonstration of kindness; hence a selection for actually feeling sympathy and not just pretending to have it. A person who genuinely felt sympathy would be quite willing to undergo costs in time, safety, money and other handicaps to help those who are oppressed. Why? Ultimately in order to impress the opposite sex, because if it weren't for that, selection would surely operate strongly against such unselfish behavior, according to Darwinists  given that one is not helping kin and not expecting any sort of reciprocity. ...

'European Awakening' --the video





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeUT3cPns9s

     Without first knowing the source, I ran across this on a news site. Yes, I know--David Duke! Still, unless someone is bigoted against Europeans, and many Europeans themselves fashionably are so, it is irrational to argue that only Europeans have no right to feel pride in their own heritage and have no right to their own homelands, while all other peoples in the world routinely unquestioningly assume they have those exact same inherent rights.

Saturday, March 16, 2013

Black-Footed Ferret Good News (unless you're a prairie dog)

Black-footed Ferrets — Will They be the Comeback Kits?


Judith Kohler Wildlife Promise 3/7/2013


The black-footed ferret has gone from near oblivion to the brink of recovery in about three decades. ... [see link]
Flickr:USFWS/Rocky Mountain-Prairie Region. The black-footed ferret is one of North America’s rarest species.

Friday, March 15, 2013

Clockwork Orange France / France Laid Waste



France Laid Waste

Rémi Tremblay, American Renaissance, March 15, 2013
FrenchFlag
Immigration and crime in la belle France.
Laurent Obertone, La France Orange Mécanique, Ring, 2013, 350 pp., €18 (in French only)
La France Orange Mécanique (Clockwork Orange France) became an instant best seller in France, finding itself in the top-ten list on Amazon.fr despite no advertising and a virtually unknown author. Even in a climate of reduced book sales, the publisher, Ring, has recently had an additional 18,000 copies printed. Some reviewers note that if this book—which describes the true face of crime in France—had been published before last year’s presidential elections, it might have had an impact on the outcome, swaying votes towards the Right.
FranceOrangeMécanique
The book, whose title refers to the 1962 Anthony Burgess novel about “ultra-violence,” begins with an all-too-common event: a white woman is savagely beaten and raped almost to death by a foreigner. This gruesome rape is presented from the victim’s perspective, allowing the reader to grasp the horror of the situation—a horror that can be washed away in a sea of statistics: 7 percent of French women are raped at some point in their lives, and there are 13,000 thefts, 2,000 assaults and 200 rapes every day in France. Behind these statistics, there are personal dramas and shattered lives. For each crime, there is a life that will never be the same. This is what Laurent Obertone wants us to remember: Crime is not a matter of numbers; it is devastating trauma.
Beyond the crime statistics, many lives are ruined by daily harassment from immigrants, but victims get no support from society and resign themselves to their fate. They suffer from depression, fear, and even suicide, but they never appear in official reports: They will be forgotten and ignored. ...

Praising Tricolored Blackbirds & Farmer Helpers


Saving Tricolored Blackbirds in California


Google Images

Thursday, March 14, 2013

KKK Democrats Best Buddy? (What is 'rough trade'?)

The KKKrazy Glue That Holds the Obama Coalition Together
March 13, 2013

Google Images
We are constantly told that the GOP is doomed because it’s the party of straight white men. That may well be true, but few have asked: How can the diverse Democrats hold together? How can special interests as different as blacks and gays be kept in sync?
The answer appears to be: The Obama coalition can stay together only by stoking resentment—and, indeed, hatred—of straight white men. This naked animus is rationalized by projecting the hate felt by the victorious Democrats onto the losers:
We hate straight white Republican men because…they are so full of…uh…hate. Yes, that’s the ticket: We hate them because they are hateful. No, wait, I mean, we hate them because they are hate-filled. They’re practically Ku Klux Klanners.
To service this Hunger for Hate, the prestige press assiduously generates the Democratic Party’s KKKrazy Glue by whipping up fear and loathing over hate crimes, even when they didn't technically happen. ...
http://takimag.com/article/the_kkkrazy_glue_that_holds_the_obama_coalition_together_steve_sailer/print#ixzz2NZfJBEvF