AOC Mocks Electoral College, Middle Americans

AOC Mocks Electoral College, Middle Americans, by Discover the Networks. Here is the future of the US left, soon to permanently lead the US due to demographic change.

The US electoral college is racist, says AOC:

In an Instagram video posted Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) ridiculed the Electoral College and, by implication, vast swaths of Americans who don’t live in Democrat-concentrated, coastal urban zones.

“We’re coming to you live from the Electoral College,” she said in the video, with the camera panning over empty fields. “Many votes here, as you can see. Very efficient way to choose leadership of the country. I mean, I can’t think of any other way. Can you?”

In a later post, AOC added, “To all the Republicans getting big mad [because] the electoral college is, in fact, a scam” followed by an article arguing that supporters of the Electoral College are clinging to a racist system that disenfranchises “millions.” …

Socialism and luxury apartments for us! For the whole world, via open borders!

At a Bronx town hall meeting on June 3, 2019, Ocasio-Cortez asserted that all Americans should be able to live in luxury apartments managed by non-profit organizations or owned communally by the tenants, and that the government should pass legislation that designates housing as a “human right.” ..

Rendered clueless by her echo chamber:

In another campaign appearance that same month, Ocasio-Cortez expounded upon her recent calls for a “Green New Deal” designed to make the U.S. 100 percent reliant on renewable energy (wind, water, solar) by 2035. “There’s no debate as to whether we should continue producing fossil fuels,” she said. “There’s no debate. We should not. Every single scientific consensus points to that.” …

During an Instagram live video appearance on February 24, 2019, Ocasio-Cortez suggested that people might be well-advised to not have children, because of the horrors that climate change was likely to inflict upon the earth in the near future …

In April 2019, Ocasio-Cortez posted a tweet claiming that climate change was a key cause of global migration patterns: “The far-right loves to drum up fear & resistance to immigrants. But have you ever noticed they never talk about what‘s causing people to flee their homes in the first place? Perhaps that’s bc they’d be forced to confront 1 major factor fueling global migration: Climate change.”


In a January 21, 2019 interview conducted by Ta-Nehisi Coates, Ocasio-Cortez stated that the United States should pay reparations to the non-white communities that had been impacted in a negative way by President Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s. …

“It’s important,” she added, “to tell the story of where we’ve been and what others are doing as well because we look at, for example, Germany, and how they’ve been able or they’re attempt to try to heal after the Holocaust. Germany paid reparations and they went through that process and they had that truth-telling process. And until America tells the truth about itself, we’re not going to heal.” …

In a series of tweets which she posted in the wake of an august 2019 mass shooting by a white supremacist in El Paso, Texas, Ocasio-Cortez wrote:

  • “Supremacists are those who have been completely overcome by the disease, but supremacy—the virus—exists on a larger scale beyond just the infected. It also lays dormant.”
  • “White supremacy is often subconscious and clearly, our nation has not been inoculated. WS is our nation’s original sin; the driving logic of slavery, of Native genocide, of Jim Crow, of segregation, of mass incarceration, of ‘Send Her Back’ [a reference to chant which Trump supporters had recently used in reference to Rep. Ilhan Omar, a native of Somalia]. It never went away. It was just dormant.”
  • “We wish it was as simple as denouncing a white hood, a burnt cross, vile language. But we need to address where supremacy *begins,* not just where it ends.”
  • “Recognizing white supremacy in ourselves—our institutions, our subconscious, our own past remarks or acts (no matter how consciously unintentional), is what makes the healing work ahead challenging.”
  • “It is incredibly important that we recognize that perfectly normal, good people are capable of aiding racism & white supremacy. Recognizing that is not about pillorying people. It’s about learning to recognize *the virus* & end an oppressive system designed to hurt us *all.*”

Grim, if you are a white American. AOC is a socialist with a long list of racial grievances. She should write a book, “My Struggle.”

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific

Civic Anti-Racism

Civic Anti-Racism, by the Z-Man.

In modern America, there are two things that are on display simultaneously in the realm of public debate. One is the celebration of the fact that white people and the interests of white people are in sharp decline. The other is a growing fear of white people. It is a strange combination at first glance, as this should be a time for the coalition of the ascendant to celebrate their looming hegemony. Instead, they endlessly talk about themselves, but in the context of a prophesized white backlash.

The root of this is the strange obsession with racism that has become a religion of its own over the last two decades. The anointing of Obama as the completion of the Second Founding, the event that was supposed to wash the stains of slavery, segregation and racism from America, instead ushered in an era of race panic. The Left is in a near frenzy over racism, which they now see everywhere. It is an obsession to the point where even the so-called Right is infected by it. …

An interesting aspect of this new civic religion of anti-racism is it is mostly built on the assumption that whites, at any minute, will go bonkers and start attacking black bodies, while erecting old statues. … It’s a genuine sense that whites are a ticking time bomb that have to be monitored.

In this sense, the new anti-racism is like the old communist obsession with opponents of the revolution. With commies, the opponents of the revolution did not have to exist, but they must be made to exist. That is, if they could not find real counter-revolutionaries, they invented them. Something similar is going on with the anti-racists. They can’t find actual white supremacists, at least not in quantity, so they hunt for signs of it, like an evil spirit lurking on the fringes. The price of anti-racism is eternal vigilance.

Meanwhile the left has inverted the definition of “racism.” Now they say you are racist if you are color blind, that all whites are racist, that “all lives matter” is racist while “black lives matter” is not, and non-whites are never racist. Uh huh.

Climate failures cost us: ALP election review

Climate failures cost us: ALP election review, by Troy Bramston.

A confidential submission to the party’s post-election review from the Labor Environment ­Action Network, obtained by The Australian, expresses “anger and disappointment”, and also “grief”, over the party’s failure to win what was expected to be an unlosable election. The submission is brutal about policy, political and leadership failures.

“Labor was unable to put a price on its climate change action plan,” a LEAN member says in the submission. “It couldn’t say how much it would cost, where the money was coming from or what economic dividend it would deliver or save. It is basic Australian politics — how much, who pays, what does it save. We had no answers.” …

LEAN has called for Labor to reconsider its “specific climate change policies” and how they are communicated …

Really, who would have guessed, with all that public money and encouragement:

“Labor’s policies were generally well received by the climate change, environment and ­renewables ‘industries’,” the submission notes.

Shame about all the real industries that make goods and services that people want. They all pay for this nonsense.

Labor lost yet another election over climate. Shame they didn’t do a bit of due diligence. They would have discovered that the case for the carbon dioxide theory of global warming is paper thin.

Here is Bill Shorten in 2015:

No area of scientific inquiry in the past 30 years has been more rigorously tested, scrutinized and peer-reviewed. So let’s not pretend we have an obligation to give equal weight, coverage and credence to the babble of denialist militia. We don’t need to ‘believe’ in gravity, we know it exists. We don’t need to ‘believe’ smoking causes cancer and heart disease, we understand it is a medical fact. We don’t need to ‘believe’ asbestos kills, we see it does. And because we know climate change is real, we all have obligation to act.

Utter bollocks. There was no public scrutiny, except by President Carter’s Charney Committee in 1979. No royal commissions, no public inquiry into the science, no red teams, no due diligence, no nothing. Just the bureaucrats of the administrative state and their follow travelers looking to expand their reach, suppressing any criticism of their favorite, self-serving theory.

Current Labor are not fit to run anything, let alone a country. How are they going to react to the forthcoming news that the theory about carbon dioxide is just due to a technical error made in the 1960s? Not well, I suspect.

How Google has destroyed the lives of revenge porn victims

How Google has destroyed the lives of revenge porn victims, by Carrie Goldberg.

At this point in time, nobody accepts a date, new hire, roommate or even college applicant without first doing a Google search. Google, with its 5.6 billion searches a day and ownership of 92.19 percent of the search-engine market share worldwide, enjoys a virtual monopoly on all of our reputations. …

One case:

One of our clients was 20 and a junior in college when she responded to the ad for bikini models and flew to San Diego to shoot the video.

After her video was posted online, she told us, “I had to change my major and career choice. I lost a lot of friends, and my family wouldn’t talk to me for a while.” …

We sent affidavits to Google urging them to remove the videos.

Google’s policies dictate only two instances when they will remove content — child pornography and copyright-infringement requests.

The current policy says Google may remove nude or sexually explicit images that were shared without consent, but the company maintains sole discretion about when to remove nonconsensual pornography. If Google decides it will keep linking to a website that contains your nude images, victims are just out of luck. And there’s no appellate body. There is no law, only corporate policy, that protects (or fails to protect) victims’ most private information. …

Google knew these women had been tricked, held captive, sexually assaulted and humiliated and were suffering because of the exposure it was causing, but corporate interest dictated total indifference. To this day, Google will not remove those links from their search-engine results. The graphic evidence of abuse now haunts these women as they apply for jobs, use social media, seek roommates, date. Most of these women remain underemployed, terrified and unable to lead normal lives because Google won’t lift a finger on the basis of its cynical corporate policy.

Another case:

In one case, our 18-year-old client “Anna” was horribly exploited by older men three times her age who videoed themselves having violent sex with her. It wasn’t long before the videos began to populate the first five pages of her search-engine results. Over the next several years, the stalking, harassment and death threats from her “fans” became unbearable. My client moved and everybody in her family changed their names, yet somebody found her new name and posted that online. The video followed her because of Google.

Initially, Google refused to remove the video because they said she didn’t own the copyright and their revenge-porn policy, they say, doesn’t apply to what they call “regret porn.”

Faulty justification:

During a congressional hearing … Representative Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said, “[If] you want positive search results, do positive things. If you want negative search results, don’t do negative things.”

But it’s not that simple. So long as anybody with an Internet connection can create content, and websites have no liability regarding the truthfulness of that information, our so-called “positive actions” can’t ensure “positive search results.”

As I say at my firm, we are all a moment away from having our life overturned by somebody hell-bent on our destruction. If somebody wants to take us down, they use the Internet to spread inescapable lies.

The bottom line:

Many people accept the ranking of search-engine results as a naturally occurring phenomenon. But deliberate decisions go into the algorithms that decide who sees what. They are business decisions. …

The vast majority of Google’s revenue comes from ads, thus requiring that its traffic stay high and that it not upset the industries — especially the always-profitable porn industry — that pay handsomely for ads.

I switched to using DuckDuckGo for searches more than a year ago. I don’t miss Google searches, and I do object to their evil.

George Pell loses his appeal on sex abuse conviction

George Pell loses his appeal on sex abuse conviction, by Tessa Akerman.

The court of appeal has split their decision but George Pell’s appeal against his conviction has been rejected. …

Pell was appealing his conviction on five charges of historical child sex abuse.

The full judgment which will be made public later today is more than 300 pages.

It’s hard to believe that Pell was convicted on the evidence, which frankly seemed dubious. I suspect the jurors in the second case and the two judges who convicted him were swayed by the perceived “social need” to convict, rather than just evidence. He may simply have been convicted for being too politically incorrect.

This bodes badly for dissent in Australia. Cross the bureaucrats of the administrative state at your peril.

The new nuclear option: small, safe and cheap

The new nuclear option: small, safe and cheap, by Aaron Patrick.

The next generation of nuclear reactors – the ones that could finally overcome Australia’s resistance to power by fission – are so small they will abide by road regulations.

Rolls-Royce is designing a reactor that will be 4.5m wide to fit under the 4.95m British road height limit. They would be built in a factory and transported to customers by truck or barge.

In the industry they are known as small modular reactors, or SMRs. They may be the most exciting development in the field since August 3, 1958, when the nuclear-powered USS Nautilus became the first sea vessel to reach the North Pole.

As the developed world tries to work out how to power their economies without contributing to global warming – some 75 per cent of Australian electricity came from coal in 2017 – nuclear power is making a comeback among experts after the backlash triggered by Fukushima Daiichi accident in Japan eight years ago.

In Australia, political and public sentiment towards nuclear could be shifted by a parliamentary inquiry initiated by Energy Minister Angus Taylor last week into nuclear as a power source.

“We always approach these things with an open mind,” Taylor said last month. …

The ARC-100’s big selling points would be simplicity and safety. The radioactive fuel would only have to be changed every 20 years. If it starts melting down, the reactor would automatically shut off without any human intervention. Most of the other reactors under development include similar so-called passive safety features.

Despite the notoriety of the disasters at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima, where a tsunami knocked out power to the reactor, triggering a nuclear core meltdown, nuclear power’s long-term safety record is strong.

More video:

‘Wall Street Journal Never Saw an American Job It Didn’t Want to Offshore’

‘Wall Street Journal Never Saw an American Job It Didn’t Want to Offshore’. By John Binder.

President Trump’s chief trade adviser Peter Navarro hit back at the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, saying they “never saw an American job” they “didn’t want to offshore.” …

“The question for the Wall Street Journal is ‘Where was the Wall Street Journal beginning in 2001 when China got into the World Trade Organization (WTO) and we watched the exodus of over 70,000 of our factories, over five million of manufacturing jobs,’” Navarro asked. “‘Why hasn’t the Wall Street Journal been editorializing over the last ten years about China’s hacking our computers to steal trade secrets, about stealing our intellectual property, about forcing the technology transfer from our companies, about the currency manipulation that occurred for over a decade?’”

“It’s called the Wall Street Journal for a reason. It represents Wall Street,” Navarro said. “And the Wall Street Journal never saw an American job it didn’t want to offshore.”

Indeed, U.S. free trade with China has eliminated about 3.4 million American jobs from the economy between 2001 and 2017 — costing workers their jobs in all fifty states. The most recent study conducted by the Coalition for a Prosperous America found that permanent 25 percent tariffs on all Chinese imports would create more than a million U.S. jobs by 2024.

Same goes for Australia, with the obvious translations.

hat-tip Charles

“White Supremacy”—the “Devil Term” Invented to Dispossess Americans

“White Supremacy”—the “Devil Term” Invented to Dispossess Americans, by Roger Devlin.

Founding stock Americans are now perilously close to becoming a powerless minority ruled over by aliens who cherish a carefully cultivated resentment—not to say hatred—towards us. If nothing is done to change the trajectory in which our society is moving, it is hard to see how our children can avoid outright physical persecution.

The hostile elites who rule over us, of course, paint a different picture. Even as they triumphantly celebrate America’s growing racial diversity, they are incredulous any whites could imagine their group is being replaced: that is a “conspiracy theory,” perhaps a symptom of mental illness. Nonwhites are, indeed, growing in numbers and power, but somehow, simultaneously, whites are not losing out in any way. Indeed, we enjoy enormous unearned privilege. The real danger to America is white supremacy, a “sinister ideology” (Donald Trump), a “depraved evil” (Ted Cruz) now said to be on the rise.

The two side in America’s looming struggle now live in such different mental universes that communication between them has become almost impossible. …

Just like in Communist Russia:

The fantasy of the Worker’s Paradise quickly gave way to a hellish tyranny accompanied by widespread famine. Since Marxism had to be true and Lenin and Stalin were leaders of genius, someone had to be responsible for this failure. Very soon it was discovered that kulaks, wreckers, and enemies of the people were preventing the success of communism. Thousands of real persons were quickly discovered to be — or rather designated as — kulaks, wreckers, and enemies of the people. Those so designated were either shipped off to Siberia or shot; they were helpless to defend themselves, because they were not being accused of any specific act. Devil terms allow the powerful to victimize the innocent precisely through their failure to denote any specific, objectively definable class of people.

Gulag prisoners at work, 1936. Is this where anti-white racism will lead?

Racists and white supremacists populate the demonology of contemporary multiculturalism. They are the heirs of last century’s kulaks just as Cultural Marxism is the heir of Marxism-Leninism. In the eyes of today’s true believers, only white supremacists prevent the emergence of a happy society in which various ethnic identity groups live side by side in mutual esteem, free of conflict. …

It was in this sense that Tucker Carlson quite accurately described white supremacy as a hoax.

Smart Progressives and the Emperor’s New Clothes

Smart Progressives and the Emperor’s New Clothes. By the Z-Man.

In modern America, it is generally assumed that intelligent people are smart about everything, not just a narrow specialty. It is also assumed, with regards to social policy, that smart people are on the “right side” of the issue. Taken together, smart people are general experts, who agree and amplify the current Progressive fads. Whenever the television chats shows want to add weight to some claim, they roll out credentialed experts to repeat what the left-wing presenter just said.

The flip side to this, of course, is that critics of the current Progressive fads are ignorant and primitive. They oppose the current trends because they lack the intellect or proper education to understand the issue. There is an oriental quality to it. The experts are talked about as enlightened, as if years of focus have allowed them to ascend to a high plane of existence. The critics, in contrast, are unenlightened, unaware there is a higher plane and thus ignorant of their own ignorance.

It is a useful social control mechanism, as it puts a tremendous moral burden on the intellectual class. No one, especially smart people, wants to be considered ignorant, so the natural tendency is to conform to the latest trends. Social pressure is a powerful weapon, as humans are social animals. To live as a pariah is the worst punishment in a status seeking community like academia. The result is the people who know better tend to keep quiet, while the rage heads and cranks run free.

Global warming is a classic example. How else could a modeling error made in the 1960s snowball into today’s free-spending political behemoth of ever-bigger government?

‘Luxury beliefs’ are the latest status symbol for rich Americans

‘Luxury beliefs’ are the latest status symbol for rich Americans, by Rob Henderson.

A former classmate from Yale recently told me “monogamy is kind of outdated” and not good for society. So I asked her what her background is and if she planned to marry.

She said she comes from an affluent family and works at a well-known technology company. Yes, she personally intends to have a monogamous marriage — but quickly added that marriage shouldn’t have to be for everyone.

She was raised by a traditional family. She planned on having a traditional family. But she maintained that traditional families are old-fashioned and society should “evolve” beyond them.

What could explain this?

In the past, upper-class Americans used to display their social status with luxury goods. Today, they do it with luxury beliefs.

People care a lot about social status. In fact, research indicates that respect and admiration from our peers are even more important than money for our sense of well-being.

We feel pressure to display our status in new ways. This is why fashionable clothing always changes. But as trendy clothes and other products become more accessible and affordable, there is increasingly less status attached to luxury goods.

The upper classes have found a clever solution to this problem: luxury beliefs. These are ideas and opinions that confer status on the rich at very little cost, while taking a toll on the lower class.

Marriage is increasingly an upper class institution. Do as we do, not as we say.

One example of luxury belief is that all family structures are equal. This is not true. Evidence is clear that families with two married parents are the most beneficial for young children. …

Relaxed attitudes about marriage trickle down to the working class and the poor. In the 1960s, marriage rates between upper-class and lower-class Americans were nearly identical. But during this time, affluent Americans loosened social norms, expressing skepticism about marriage and monogamy.

This luxury belief contributed to the erosion of the family. Today, the marriage rates of affluent Americans are nearly the same as they were in the 1960s. But working-class people are far less likely to get married. Furthermore, out-of-wedlock birthrates are more than 10 times higher than they were in 1960, mostly among the poor and working class. Affluent people seldom have kids out of wedlock but are more likely than others to express the luxury belief that doing so is of no consequence.

Two mass murders a world apart share a common theme: ‘ecofascism’

Two mass murders a world apart share a common theme: ‘ecofascism’, by Joel Achenbach.

Before the slaughter of dozens of people in Christchurch, New Zealand and El Paso, Texas this year, the accused gunmen took pains to explain their fury, including their hatred of immigrants. The statements that authorities think the men posted online share another obsession: overpopulation and environmental degradation.

The alleged Christchurch shooter, who is charged with targeting Muslims and killing 51 people in March, declared himself an “eco-fascist” and railed about immigrants’ birthrates. The statement linked to the El Paso shooter, who is charged with killing 22 people in a shopping area earlier this month, bemoans water pollution, plastic waste and an American consumer culture that is “creating a massive burden for future generations.”

The two mass shootings appear to be extreme examples of ecofascism – what Hampshire College professor emeriti Betsy Hartmann calls “the greening of hate.”

Many white supremacists have latched onto environmental themes, drawing connections between the protection of nature and racial exclusion. These ideas have shown themselves to be particularly dangerous when adopted by unstable individuals prone to violence and convinced they must take drastic actions to stave off catastrophe. …

Ecofascism has deep roots. There is a strong element of it in the Nazi emphasis on “blood and soil,” and the fatherland, and the need for a living space purified of alien and undesirable elements.

Meanwhile, leaders of mainstream environmental groups are quick to acknowledge their movement has an imperfect history when it comes to race, immigrationand inclusiveness. Some early conservationists embraced the eugenics movement that saw “social Darwinism” as a way of improving the human race by limiting the birthrates of people considered inferior. …

Conservationists have a long history of wrestling with questions about immigration and population growth. Some of those on the environmental left have seen the explosion in the human population — which is nearing 8 billion and has more than doubled in the past half-century — as a primary driver of the environmental crisis. That argument has then been adopted by racists.

The alleged Christchurch shooter began his online screed by writing, “It’s the birthrates. It’s the birthrates. It’s the birthrates,” and then warned of the “invasion” by immigrants who will “replace the White people who have failed to reproduce.”

The document believed posted by the alleged El Paso shooter cites birthrates among the “invaders” trying to enter the U.S., and asserts, “If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can become more sustainable.”

All sentiments much closer to Rousseau than Locke, to collectivism rather than individualism.

People of a collectivist bent just don’t seem to grasp that race realism, color blindness, and treating people as individuals rather than groups is not only more moral but avoids their nasty hangups and contradictions about race — such as race is a social construct, there is no such thing as race, all whites are racist, and treating people of different races the same is “racist,” etc. etc.

St Paul, Israel Folau, Sex, and Slavery — in Context

St Paul, Israel Folau, Sex, and Slavery — in Context, by Michael Dunn.

The Folau controversy prompted me to read a book by Sarah Ruden, a translator of Virgil’s Aeneid, titled Paul Among the People. She examines what Paul said in the context of the customs, the morals and the laws of his time, using relevant texts of Greco-Roman civilisation. She reveals a world of slavery, everyday brutality and prostitution, and a harsh attitude to life. …


For the Greeks, adultery was illegal. In Athens, the household of an adulterous woman would be broken up. The children of her marriage would be considered illegitimate, they could no longer inherit and were no longer citizens. The adulterous man, however, the real guilty party, was despised as are pedophiles today. The full force of public anger and punishment was aimed at him. Adultery was considered all the more licentious because there were so many prostitutes, and there was no shame about using them. Also, men had many opportunities for free sex with slaves and unmarried freed women. The Romans were less severe, although adultery was usually the end of a marriage and the guilty man could be the target of vengeance and perhaps hired killers. …


Paul sees the body as a temple, where flesh and the spirit meet. Fornication, expressed here as sex with a harlot, pollutes and desecrates that temple, making it not worth the price Christ paid for it by his crucifixion.

In Paul’s time, a long-term intimate relationship among slaves, freed people and the poor did not involve an official marriage, a rite normally reserved for the well-off. Therefore, according to Ruden, ‘fornication’ is not the right word to translate porneia which Paul had condemned. This Greek word, which derives from the verb ‘to buy’, meant ‘whoring’. Prostitutes were mostly slaves. Some of the women had to parade naked, and there are Greek vases showing men hitting them. Even in the case of sex without payment, there was frequent brutality and little romance. The author suggests that Paul wished to condemn the use of a person as a mere object. He demanded a new sort of intimate relationship, a true and sanctified union, to which adultery and whoring were utterly alien. …


Paul was Jewish, and Judaism had always condemned homosexual acts. For Gentiles, it was customary to use young male slaves for sex. Paul would have seen, among the prostitutes on the street, young boys. At every slave market handsome boys were sold to pimps who paid high prices. The clients, to demonstrate their masculinity and to preserve their reputation, would often act brutally. The boys were used, humiliated and damaged, morally and physically. Wealthy parents had to employ minders to protect handsome sons from sexual assaults while walking to school or to the market.


Ruden presents Paul not as a Puritan but as a man fiercely angered by debauchery and sexual violence, a man who wanted Christians to live differently in faithful intimate relationships, abandoning selfishness, violence and all trace of exploitation. …

Folau’s selective list of sins and sinners to be warned about the torments of hell is blind to the historical context. It sells Paul and Christianity short: ‘just avoid these sins, and you won’t go to hell when you die’.

Now that the left is busying unraveling the Christian basis to our society, positively encouraging previously illicit sex, and creating a global elite who look down on the rest of us — what is there to look forward to? It’d be like a return to old times.