Posted On: Saturday - January 25th 2020 10:49PM MST
In Topics:   Immigration Stupidity  Humor
Thanks go to commenter Dtbb for pointing out this funny Bablyon Bee article.
Disaster At Seesaw Art Installation As Obese American Children Catapult Mexicans Over The Border
Here's about 1/2 of it:
SUNLAND PARK, NM—Disaster occurred at the US-Mexico border earlier this week after the installation of seesaws on the border wall. Part of an art project by UC Berkeley faculty, the seesaws were intended to let kids on both sides of the border play with each other as a powerful statement about unity and love across borders.Haha. Read the whole (short) thing, as they say. It probably be good for me to read the Babylon Bee site daily.
Unfortunately, as obese American kids rushed to the seesaws to enjoy playing with their fellow humans on the Mexican side of the border, they accidentally launched hundreds of Mexican children over the wall.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Coronavirus in China .. and beyond
Posted On: Saturday - January 25th 2020 5:52PM MST
In Topics:   Cheap China-made Crap  China  Healthcare Stupidity
After reading our post The Peoples' Pig, the reader may be wondering whether we consider this the biggest thing going on in China right now. As we've stated many times, this is not a news site. However, this Coronavirus thing could end up being a big deal. One never knows with these things, but old China-hand John Derbyshire is kind of down on all the hype about it.
You may have read about the quarantine of the city of Wuhan. Let me tell you, when they say city in China they mean millions - Wuhan, capital of Hubei province, has 11 million people, more than NY City (estimated at 8 1/2 million). What's called a village over there can easily mean a place with a bigger population than Tampa, Florida. There's a big market for the face masks, and that's what this post is about.
This is another China story gleaned from personal experience. A salesman of non-woven face masks, gowns, shoe coverings and that kind of thing filled me in on this: The factory there, a lean/mean non-government-run operation with about 10 office staff and 200 people who actually manufactured the items would sell within China and outside of China. Due to the boss’ unscrupulousness, when the made the masks for domestic sales, they would skip the material (and production step) of putting the layer of filter material in place among the material of the face masks. What that means is that the masks were pretty much worthless, except for compliance purposes.
Now, for foreign sales, the boss knows that the Germans, for example*, would send a container of defective items (purposefully, BTW) back across the oceans. Many Chinese customers, at the wholesale level, that is, might not care, what with the good price, and others might.
Unscrupulousness – it can result in death. As much as I detest Big-Biz all over the world, American small-businessmen, as compared to this small company in China, would not do something so evil.
So, that's just great - plenty of people who are trying to protect themselves and their families and maybe even do the right thing to protect others are being lulled into thinking their face masks are good for something. Here in America, lots of people still have enough room so that we would not have to interact with others outside our families if a deadly disease like this were getting seriously threatening. (Preps, bitchez!)
Wouldn't it be nice to keep our population density way down below the level of China? What would it take for open-borders nuts to understand this, a full out epidemic ahd Cheap China-made face masks that kill millions?
* Actual example. Then the container was held up for most of a year at the docks in Shenzhen, as the Chinese government does not encourage imports (see, they were under the impression that the shipment was imports rather than returned goods.)
No comments - Click here to start thread
America - Don't Cross the River ...
Posted On: Friday - January 24th 2020 10:48PM MST
In Topics:   Music
... if you can't swim the tide.
America in this post is the 3-man 1970s folk-rock band. Most of what I know from the band is from their excellent History: America's Greatest Hits album with not a bad song on it*. The band consisted of 3 "army brats", sons of Air Force members, and they met in London as their Dads were stationed there.
Don't Cross the River is not one of their multiple hit songs that are on that Greatest Hits album, but it is my favorite. I just learned it was originally off the band's 1972 Homecoming album. That was 48 years ago!!
Gerry Beckley – lead and backing vocals, keyboards, guitars, bass, harmonica
Dewey Bunnell – lead and backing vocals, guitars, percussion
Dan Peek – lead and backing vocals, guitars, bass, keyboards, harmonica
but, it's a guy named Henry Diltz who played the banjo in this song.
Dan Peek died in 2011.
* ... though, if you don't like sap, you kinda have to skip Muskrat Love, a few years later made popular by The Captain and Tennille.
No comments - Click here to start thread
Richmond gun rally - a lesson about ignoring the narrative
Posted On: Friday - January 24th 2020 2:30PM MST
In Topics:   Lefty MegaStupidity  TV, aka Gov't Media  Media Stupidity  Liberty/Libertarianism  alt-right  ctrl-left
(Yeah, there could have been some antifa freaks scattered about the crowd. What good would that do them, though? They wouldn't have had a fighting chance.
This post could have been written before the gun-rights rally in Richmond, VA on Monday, but I'm trying to catch up with the mound of material in the "urgent stupidity" file that sits on top of the desk in
There wqs discouragement from both sides of the
It was the ctrl-left, however, in government and in their Lyin' Press branch of the Establishment, that made a, if not concerted, widespread effort to discourage turn-out in Richmond. I don't follow the Lyin' Press directly, but even on Steve Sailer's blog, there was both writing about worries for those attending and writing on the one particular incident of the 3 "White Nationalists" (I put the quotes cause I don't know, and I don't care) arrested and made into a big story.
As the long-term reader will know, Peak Stupidity believes in very few long-term conspiracy theories. It's just that there are lots of people that think the same way and want the same thing, even if it's subconsciously. Support of the narrative that the armed Virginians and others were coming to start a shoot-out was widespread. It would have really helped the narrative, if the Lyin' Press had at least mentioned something about attendance by antifa, but I didn't read much about that. Why would there then be shooting battle, then, without them? All who have read some details of Charlottesville know that there'd have been no violence had the antifa froons (freakish goons?) left the Unite the Right statue defenders along. Was the worry that these armed citizens were just going to up and pick a fight with the Virginia law present in Richmond? Everyone knows that's not the case, but that was part of the lying to support the narrative.
Back to the story of the 3-man "The base" organization, well that was just a hoot! I really think there is too much Affirmative Action in the FBI, if their organizers can't think of something more original that a name that's the translation of "Al Qaeda". Then, OMG, they were harboring an illegal alien! Nobody does that, right? (No, not really - you don't have to, as the other 30,000,000 illegal aliens live perfectly safe out of the shadows under that warm California sun.) If that story just wasn't so gosh-darned stupid, maybe it'd helped a little bit. Nobody wants to go to a rally and be associated with people who harbor illegal aliens, right, La Raza?
BTW, what was hilarious that in my search for pictures of those "The Base" group ("Richmond" "the base" "arrests" "images") came up with the collage of images below:
From the government side of the Establishment, we had the Virginia Governor (seen in quite a few signs at the rally sporting a Hitler mustache - photoshop... or, more like MS-Paint?) Northam. His office had gone as far as declaring a State of Emergency due to this rally. There's some hype to fit the narrative. Would he do the same thing for a La Raza rally? If it's an emergency every time free speech is being exercised, then I wish he'd been at the airport with me a few times as I was bombarded by a loud-ass TV spewing out CNN nonstop. It's an emergency to me when the A/C socket is up too high to unplug the thing.
Very near the time of the rally, I'd heard the news that people would be screened if going near the State House, inside a fence that was set up. This act discouraged a lot of armed people who planned on rallying close-in, as there was likely no safe place to store one's weapon (after all, the reports said there'd be opposition, meaning your car may not be safe).
Haha, yeah, my tight schedule had me way more stressed out than any worries about violence at the rally. You know what helped, though? As I searched for information on the rally, I had to go to the 2nd page of the search results in order to find a non-Lyin' Press blurb. The first page had results, coincidentally, that all spouted the narrative, while the 2nd had the page of the Virginia Civil Defense League, that organizes the damn thing each year. I went to that site and read nothing but a short description and lots of logistics info. It's funny how the search engine (Duckduckgo, no less) didn't give me a site with straight information about the rally on the 1st page. Yes, the Big-Biz F.A.G.S. were down with this supporting the narrative too.
We must all make an effort to get away from these narratives in our daily lives, or we will get pushed around by the ctrl-left, even if that is by convincing us to not show up.
No comments - Click here to start thread
NPR concurs with Peak Stupidity... we are officially worried now.
Posted On: Thursday - January 23rd 2020 3:33PM MST
In Topics:   Treehuggers  Media Stupidity
In our 2 y/o post Toward Sustainable Stupidity*, Peak Stupidity made a point about recycling. We noted that just because one may put almost all his waste in that bright green recycling can doesn't mean 1/2 that trash will end anywhere different than the stuff from the blue can does. The real reason to recycle is to keep costs down for the trucks hauling garbage to landfills further out of town (there is plenty of room for 100X more landfills, but you gotta pay for the transportation.)
Anyway, while listening to a blurb on NPR, yes that channel, a few days back, this time somewhat through fault of my own**, I heard them in the middle of a story about pretty much just what I wrote in that Toward Sustainable Stupidity post. Though the broadcaster was no eventually-dashed-fantasy Nina Totenberg, pondered in "All Things Considered", it's been a long road to Peak Stupidity, I listened for about 2 minutes before turning it off. This guy did not use the words "virtue signaling" or anything like that regarding the people that think they have recycled 90% of their trash-mass. However, he did go as far as to say it made people "feel better" about their concern for the planet. That's a start toward realizing what it's mostly about.
Here's NPR's concern below, from their website (yes, I had to hold my nose). It's somehow about the climate, you can see. WTF? It's trash, man, it doesn't affect the climate. I guess they are just so used to the words ...
Having ascertained that Peak Stupidity is 2 years ahead of NPR in our thinking was kind of worrying. What else do we agree with them on? Crap. Well, I turned that guy off quickly before there was another and before that soothing, soothing ... voice... lulled me to sleep ... on the Interstate ... oh, Nina, that feels nice, Nina ...
* Probably one of my favorite of our post titles. True, it should read the other way "Sustainability Stupidity" or something like that, but my way resembles the average modern $2,000/weekend (meals extra) seminar title and, either way, it LOLs me once in a while.
** It was not my car, and it was preset in the radio, which was left on.
No comments - Click here to start thread
The Mandibles - Book Review - Part 3
Posted On: Thursday - January 23rd 2020 7:02AM MST
In Topics:   Preppers and Prepping  Economics  The Future  Books
(See this book review intro. and then Part 2.)
Where Peak Stupidity left off in our series of review posts of the 2016 Lionel Shriver book The Mandibles was a discussion of the poor economic situation in near-future (2029) America. For the situation at the beginning of the book, no real even it needed, such as that "Stoneage" that is mentioned, but never really explained. Things are deteriorating now, and, unless America starts creating wealth again, and the governments and people stop borrowing to keep up their lifestyles, I don't see why this won't continue.
To repeat, this novel really has it's basis in economic theories. The importance and worth, then worthlessness, of the once-almighty US dollar is explained, with the Econ. Professor husband/father Lowell expounding his Keynesianism in both discussions with his nephew Willing and at the dinner party early in the book. Not to spoil the story for the reader too much at this point, but the author, it turns out, is no Keynesian but more like a Libertarian (from Brooklyn! Really?) Interest rates, inflation, and the FED are mentioned so much that I think Ron Paul should have written a foreword fo the book.
It's a pretty good extrapolation, at least in the early part of the book, to have the older people, the Boomers and older, be the only people in America with much money. Many do have real assets, but the younger, especially latest 30 y/o's don't have money to put down on anything. This is both in the book and my opinion, but a good share of the blame should go to the school loan scam, discussed here (Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3*) but NOT discussed in the book.
The younger set in the beginning of this novel is struggling mightily to just keep decent food on the table and conserve water. This is seen from a female perspective, which I can't complain about, and she gets into lots of detail. It is also seen from the viewpoint of city dwellers only. That is something that preppers are going to have a problem with, as the first thing a real prepper would tell you is "get out of the city". He may mean having your bug-out bag and vehicle ready to escape at any time, or more generally, for what's coming, DO NOT LIVE IN THE CITY - you'll be toast. I agree, but this city perspective in the book is a nice change from the advice about how to hook up your generator to propane and how much diesel to store on the farm and that sort of thing. From what happens next, the preppers are right, of course.
What happens next - pretty early on in the book - is that President Alvarado announces a renunciation of debts owed in US Dollars. I should backtrack just a little and say that the Euro countries, Russia, S. America (I think?) have all created a new currency called the "Bancor" that is being used instead of dollars. I.e, the 90 years stint of the buck as the reserve currency is ovah! Well, you can hyper-inflate all the debt away or you can renunciate the debt and have the money become worthless the latter way, but, no matter which, assets in this currency will (and DID, in the book) become worthless.
The author gets into the real economic crisis at the family level (mainly both the 3rd/4th generation families - Florence/Estaban and kid and Avery/Lowell and 3 kids). Things get bad, and then worse yet, but again the perspective is from the woman homemaker Florence. It gets down to the shortage and eventual total lack of toilet paper, water usages, and all that stuff that one might really not want to think about - yes, the author drills down to the level of wiping one's ass. Hey, it's not like this isn't important. I respect her pushing the points home that preppers have been well aware of - buying lots and lots of TP is always recommended. Still, whatever amount of TP you buy, and beans you have in #10 cans, there'll never be enough room in the city to have that much, there are people close by (and a real lack of long guns in Brooklyn - thanks Bloombergs!) that will make it all hard to defend. I would say that the middle of this book, though maybe not written for this purpose, does a great job of telling the reader "get the hell out of the cities."
(Even way out in the country, of course, with a long-term decline, all the stored stuff is only to hold one over. If it were for natural disasters, that works great. For a long-term seemingly permanent massive economic decline, the preppers discuss all that's needed to rebuild and keep things going with food on the table.)
That brings me back to the real problem with this woman's perspective, as though, the author writes of what she knows, a good thing, it means that all the other aspects of exactly what won't work in civilization and why are completely left out. It's likely too far a reach from a single woman who lives in "Brooklyn and London" to discuss exactly who will be able to bring back civilization, even at a lower level. That means men. That means men that have skills too, whether hand skills, but also mechanical thinking by engineering types.** Uh-oh, that means white men (to do it right!) That would have been a real problem, discussing how the Lats were going to rebuild civilization to the level of, what, Bolivia? Did the massive immigration bring in people who can no longer rebuild what was America? The book doesn't answer this one.
This is where the story has some irony, as Americans are not let across the border into Mexico even, and only the rich can get out (but without their cash - I'll get into that juicy economic/political stuff in a later post). In fact, the Mexicans have built some kind of big, beautiful wall - no, not a wall really, but a border barrier that works. (They would have used American escapee's remittance money, but there are currency controls, haha!) The other irony is that it's the Oriental tourists and speculators that are now traveling around, buying buildings for cheap, and living off what is a pittance in their own currencies, having a blast and feeling sorry for the poor destitute Americans. It's not sorry enough to where they are sending any aid, though. I guess even a Brooklynite author knows how things really work.
I will keep going with this review. Stay tuned.
* That's just discussion of the "forgiveness" aspect, as there's plenty more with the University and Economics topic keys)
** This is kind of a funny aspect, as Lowell, the Econ. Prof. is looked down upon by his wife Avery due to this not being any kind of skill that helps the Mandible family survive the new American economy I, and any decent non-Statist, would suggest that being an Econ. Professor NEVER helps the economy, other than just the simple teaching of the real basic supply&demand stuff to people who may run a business - see The Non-Science of Economics.
Since the former professor (he got laid off early on) is a Keynesian, his economically-precocious (and important character) nephew Willing has no respect for him, not does the author. Lowell remains a Keynesian until the long run, when we are all dead. (No, no, that was NOT a spoiler!)
No comments - Click here to start thread
Blast from the past - Disgraced fake historian Michael Bellesiles
Posted On: Wednesday - January 22nd 2020 7:31PM MST
In Topics:   Lefty MegaStupidity  University  History  Liberty/Libertarianism  ctrl-left  Books  Big-Biz Stupidity
A commenter on a Steve Sailer thread on guns, gun violence, and gun rights brought up a real blast from the past just now. The comment jogged my memory of reading Instapundit almost hourly back then, and he kept his readers updated on the story of the lying historian Michael Bellesiles and his book Arming America. Its been almost 20 years, and if I were to wait toward the end of this year, the publication date, to celebrate, I'm absolutely sure I'll forget about it. Yes, there was actually some pushback from real historians, even on the lefty side, back 20-16 years ago, against not just historical inaccuracy and slight exaggerations, but work that was supposed to be scholarly and well-sourced but was sourced only by the author's left-wing bias and flat-out lies.
In Arming America, Mr. Bellesiles supposedly "debunked the myths" of early America having had a big gun culture, going back to the patriots of the Revolutionary times. It was almost all a load of horsecrap, which would have been fine if it were just a book advertised to be of opinions, not rigorous history. The former Emory University history professor went way too far in pushing his narrative, as he did quote many sources, later "determined" to be lost afterwards due to flooding in library basements and that sort of thing.
On a site called Intellectual Takeout, a writer named Chris Calton wrote "What the Fake History of Guns Can Teach Us" just over a year back. It has a recap of the whole Bellesiles scandal. Wiki has as pretty fair summary of the whole sordid affair too. Just as the US Gov. Eric Holder-led DOJ scam was exposed by a couple of bloggers, as Peak Stupidity described a few weeks back, it was a historian, software developer, gun enthusiast blogger named Clayton Cramer who really exposed Michael Bellesiles as the lying sack-o-shit that he was. He would have gotten away with it all, too, if it hadn't been for those meddling history bloggers!
I looked back on Amazon today after I recalled this whole thing. The damn original Amazon editorial review is still up! Is it that the company, having been way more than a bookstore since pretty much the time of this controversy, didn't put in the money to have real reviewers anymore or anyone to go through with corrections? Maybe that's the case, but it could also be that this monster of Big-Biz, though not directly part of the F.A.G.S. "space", is on the usual ctrl-left side in this system of Crony-Capitalism we have now. Here's what amazon still has up on that page linked-to up top:
While gun supporters use the nation's gun-toting history in defense of their way of life, and revolutionary enthusiasts replay skirmishes on historic battlefields, it now turns out that America has not always had a gun culture, and wide-scale gun ownership is much newer than we think. After a 10-year search for "a world that isn't there," professor and scholar Michael Bellesiles discovered that Americans not only rarely owned guns prior to the Civil War, they wouldn't even take them for free from a government that wanted to arm its reluctant public. No sharpshooters, no gun in every home, no children learning to hunt beside their fathers. Bellesiles--whose research methods have generated a great deal of controversy and even a subsequent investigation by Emory University--searched legal, probate, military, and business records; fiction and personal letters; hunting magazines; and legislation in his quest for the legendary gun-wielding frontiersman, only to discover that he is a myth. There are other revelations: gun ownership and storage was strictly legislated in colonial days, and frivolous shooting of a musket was backed by the death penalty; men rarely died in duels because the guns were far too inaccurate (duels were about honor, not murder); pioneers didn't hunt (they trapped and farmed); frontier folk loved books, not guns; and the militia never won a war (it was too inept). In fact, prior to the Civil War, when mass production of higher quality guns became a reality, the republic's greatest problem was a dearth of guns, and a public that was too peaceable to care about civil defense. As Bellesiles writes, "Probably the major reason why the American Revolution lasted eight years, longer than any war in American history before Vietnam, was that when that brave patriot reached above the mantel, he pulled down a rusty, decaying, unusable musket (not a rifle), or found no gun there at all." Strangely, the eagle-eye frontiersman was created by East Coast fiction writers, while the idea of a gun as a household necessity was an advertising ploy of gun maker Samuel Colt (both just prior to the Civil War). The former group fabricated a historic and heroic past while Colt preyed on overblown fears of Indians and blacks.
Now, somewhere deep into the 135 comments, pretty early on, lies my favorite. It's not a review of the book, though. It's more an evisceration of the amazon review:
Amazon.com book reviewer debunked in academic skirmishThe early '00s were still a time before which the universities world had not been completely infiltrated by the ctrl-left. Though there were plenty of lefties, especially in the humanities, such as history, there was obviously still some integrity left. Michael Bellesiles was stripped of the coveted Columbia University Bancroft prize that he had been awarded for this very book. That had never happened before and hasn't since. He had to give back the 4 grand, which is more like 7 grand in today's money. He "resigned" from Emory University, and was later found teaching at Central Connecticut State University in New Britain. That university's History Department web site no longer lists him as a faculty member there. He may have retired, or else the other 18 professors don't want people to know he works there.
OK, here's what the impartial amazon book reviewer had to say. I quote:
"it now turns out that America has not always had a gun culture, and wide-scale gun ownership is much newer than we think."
Oops, after being checked by real history professors, it turns out that, yes, dangit, we did have a gun culture and wide-scale gun ownership is old just like we thought.
"No sharpshooters, no gun in every home, no children learning to hunt beside their fathers"
Oops, yeah there were sharpshooters, most homes had at least one long gun, and who in heck else did children learn to hunt from, the family cat (ha, ha!)
"Bellesiles--whose research methods have generated a great deal of controversy and even a subsequent investigation by Emory University- ..." (Oh, and subsequent firing and revocation of his 4-grand in cash.) "..."
"Strangely, the eagle-eye frontiersman was created by East Coast fiction writers,..."
Oops, predictably, the four-eyed anti-gun frontiersman was created by an East Coast fiction writer (name starts with B, rhymes with a female body part.)
"He [Bellesiles]is more interested in discovering the truth than in taking sides. "
Oops, no, uh, sorry, here's where I beg to differ with you, Mr. Reviewer.
"His work .... will be hard to refute". No problem - all in a day's work, my friend.
What would happen nowadays if the same bit of complete ctrl-left lying in a purported scholarly work were found out? My guess there would be nobody left on the right to investigate, but were there one, he would be called names and punished. What a great memory this deal was, though!
The Peoples' Pig
Posted On: Wednesday - January 22nd 2020 9:52AM MST
In Topics:   China  Economics  Socialism/Communism  Inflation
The image above, just one of Zerohedge's humorous pictures, was used here on our recent article A Porcine Crisis in China. In that article we described the problem the Chinese people are having obtaining pork at decent prices, as there was a big swine flu epidemic. This one, unlike the newest viral deal coming, seems contained within the porcine community.
That's a problem, though, as pork is not just "the other white meat" for Chinamen (AND women), but the favorite meat there. The've been hog-wild about it for a long time. I assume it's due to not having the huge amounts of open, level (within reason, that is) land for cows to graze in, therefore resulting in a taste for pork over the hundreds or thousand of years, if the people are to have any meat AT ALL I wrote the last part, because, old China history that I don't know about aside, the 40 years of hard-core Communism made meat a condiment more than a serious part of a meal. That's changed since "we got better", but this latest crisis will bring back old memories to older Chinese men and women.
I wrote this post out of some first-hand knowledge about the very recent situation some south-central parts of China, but then looked up more. The Bloomberg article I found, Chinese City Goes Back to Rationing to Curb Rampant Pork Priced is specifically about the city of Nanning* in Yunnan province, just N. of Vietnam. My information was from a different province there. Bloomberg says:
Vendors in 10 selected wet markets in Nanning, capital of the southern region of Guangxi, are selling pork cuts capped at a maximum price over the first 10 days of September, according to a statement posted on the website of the local government’s planning body. The most expensive, ribs, won’t retail for more than 32.2 yuan ($4.50) per half a kilo.Well, sure, that's a good bit cheaper than the $7 a lb. (OK, about $6.50/ 1/2-kg - a Jin, the unit they use on the street) that I mentioned due to personal knowledge in that previous Peak Stupidity post. Even though $4/lb is a lot of money for even the middle class pork-eating family in China (making $1,000 to $2,000 monthly), that makes it sound like things are looking up, porcinically. What's the catch? Is it the virtues of State control again? [/sarcasm] (... just in case in needed that tag)
There's that headline with the word "rationing", as I've translated** from the personal news of mine. That's the catch. See, a free market may have some price gouging going on when things become hard to get ahold of at the normal prices, but price gouging is just peachy to me. As we wrote in Price Gouging - Peak Stupidity is FOR IT. (see?), if sales come at higher prices because the stuff is hard to get, then more power to the gougers for getting off their asses and being entrepreneurial. You'll soon see others get in that game, trying to find new sources, of, in this case, pork, to get in the game. Prices will come down eventually.
But NO, NO NO, China's governments and the people there can not get that pig-headed Statism out of their heads for the lives of them. Now, harkening back to those days in the early 1980's (yes, still!), government rationing is supposed to divvy up what they've got of the pork "fairly". Again, from the Bloomberg article:
For many, rationing evokes the hardships of wartime, but China’s so-called planned supply method of distributing groceries harks back to its communist heyday of the 1950s. It was gradually abolished in the 1980s as supplies became more ample following economic reforms.That's one kilo per week if it's anything close to the information from my source. Shame on you Bloomberg, for leaving out this part of the units.
Each customer is allowed only 1 kilo of pork, the Nanning Evening News, a local government newspaper, reported on Sunday. The steps are necessary to control surging prices given the time it’ll take for pork production to recover, the newspaper said.
On the recovering bit, it'd go a whole lot faster if you'd let the free market work and not limit sellers of pork to prices they may not now make money on. Oh, well, back to meat as a condiment for a while. Old Chinafolks can reminisce about that sweet old world of Chairman Mao. "We walked to our jobs breaking big rocks into little rocks for the glorious roads for 10 miles, through the snow, uphill both ways. We got home, wiped our feet, swept more dirt onto our floor, set a piece of The People's coal on fire, and we got our cards and all went to The People's store as a family to get The People's beans, the People's rice from Mao's Iron Rice Bowl, and occasionally just The People (some call it 'Long Pig'). AND! WE! LIKED! IT!"
Young Chinawomen may not agree with their elders on this fondness for those good old days. "We have 2 children since lecently-lescinded 1-child poricy. My husband make good money. Here is 200-yuan - 6 Jin pork chops, chee-ing." "No can do, doesn't matter how much money, you have one card." "But, kids need protein. I pay you." "So sorry, 1 kilo ... abadee, abadee, that's all, folks!"
PS: I just wanted to add this part as related to the preference for pork over beef in China. My sources tell me that people do like the beef too, but some unscrupulous sellers pass of pork as beef. I don't know how you do it, but these people are nothing if not ingenious. Right now, there'd be no point.
"Let them eat cow!"
- Mao Wei Ahn Tran Eat
* Don't even ask if it's a "big city". Anything called a "city" in China is BIG, believe me. If there are under 1/2 a million, you live in a village.
** No, I can't translate much from Chinese, but I translated from an English version of the story that didn't use the word rationing, but involved rationing.
No comments - Click here to start thread
There's great power in numbers - Case study: Richmond, Virginia
Posted On: Tuesday - January 21st 2020 11:18AM MST
In Topics:   US Police State  Liberty/Libertarianism
Peak Stupidity has written this not-too-particularly-insightful phrase numerous times (here, here, here, here, and here), and you'll read it again.
Peak Stupidity used our generous funds donated by our bloggers to send our one and only lead blogger to the gun rights rally in Richmond, Virginia yesterday (01/20/2020). I'll write another post on the narrative build-up in the days before the rally, but please realize that the VCDL (Virginia Civil Defense League) has been running this rally/meeting-with-reps at the Virginia State House on the day of the beginning of the legislative session for YEARS. This was not something new, and not something designed to particularly interrupt other festivities related to the bullshit MILK Feral holiday.
There was a big crowd. Before I heard other estimates, my guess from a pretty good vantage point (of the main area, though not including all side streets) was of 10,000 people at least, -50% to +300%, because sizing crowds is not something I'm an expert at. I've heard afterwards that there may have been 20,000, but, then again, you'll hear all kinds of numbers from all kinds of estimates. I'll state this from 30 minutes of looking at pictures searched on the web later on. There was definitely an effort by the Lyin' Press sites to minimize the apparent crowd size. Here you go:
The areas that are bare in pictures are areas that are blocked of, with an exception of the grounds inside the fence at the State House. Very close to the rally day (maybe the day before or that morning) it was announced that those inside that fence would be screened. (Yes, it's unconstitutional.) This kept out anyone who was carrying arms, along with plenty more who didn't like the idea and/or were pressed for time. All the other areas were FILLED with good-natured, civil, 95% white supporters of the US Constitution, particularly Amendment II.
That view is to the north. The flag says: "The Constitution is my gun permit".
The Virginia State Reps, all of whom I've gotta admit, I don't know the names of, came walking through the clear area from the NW. I believe they were all GOP, or at least not anti-gun nuts, as they got cheers, and most of them wore orange "Guns save lives" stickers, as did lots of people in the crowd. Most came toward the crowd and shook a few hands.
That photo is looking SE, and shows just how jammed-up this portion of the crowd was.
Does anyone think it possible that this group of gun-rights protesters could have been Charlottesvilled? In Charlottesville, it was pure Anarcho-tyranny (as detailed here and here). All the establishment, the Lyin' Press, the local government (Federal government too, when it comes down to it), and local police, were on the side of the antifa Commies and against the few dozen trying to have a peaceful assembly to simply speak in support of Southern heritage and a statue.
That wasn't quite the situation in Richmond, Virginia, but it could have been that way, had there been 100 people or so. No, it's not all the guns, but the numbers. Yes, having one in 10 people (just a rough estimate by me) openly armed* with ARs or other rifles certainly beats a completely unarmed crowd, but the hippies in the 1960s, in crowds of 10's of thousands, did OK, too.
Are there enough handcuffs in Richmond to take these people all in? That's written in jest just from a sign I saw. Really though, it's not possible to arrest them all. How about a big push by cops with shield and beat-down sticks? Can you really push that crowd around? Most would try to comply for a while, just to avoid a bloody mess. However, at some point, armed people will realize what I've just read on a sign - "The 2nd Amendment is there to protect the 1st"**, is becoming their reality. Not many really hope it comes to that, but the stage would be set.
Sure there were helicopters in the air, 4 of them at one time that I saw. They were there for observation. Attacking from the air with the military wouldn't work if the people were mixing it up down there. Were the police, many who were likely on the side of the good people rallying in Richmond anyway, to really start something violent, they would likely regret it soon after.
It was a nice cool morning, a great crowd, and a successful rally. No matter how much insulation that old Virginia State House may have, I'm sure the patriotic American people were heard yesterday.
* There could have been many more than that carrying concealed. I'd hope so, in fact.
** Of course that's only part of the story, but signs can only be so big ...
The Mandibles - Book Review - Part 2
Posted On: Saturday - January 18th 2020 11:07PM MST
In Topics:   Preppers and Prepping  Economics  The Future  Books
(The first post on this book was an intro., but I'd better make this Part 2 for keeping track.)
"Mandible" is the family name of most of the characters in the book. The author features 4 generations of the Mandible family, starting with "Great-Grand-Man", as they call him, one Douglas Mandible. He is the old family patriarch who lives in a nursing home at the start but is completely lucid and still taking care of his 2nd wife, 2 or 3 decades younger, but demented. Douglas Mandible has invested the fortune from his ancestors wisely, so early on in the book, there is mention of his fortune helping the next generations after he passes.
Then there is his son Carter, with his wife Jayne, parents of two daughters and a son. The son Jarred is mentioned as some hippy-radical, but not present in the story until the very end. The two daughters, Florence and Avery play big parts. I'll get back to them and their husbands (oops, "partner" for the former) and children in a bit. I mentioned in the week-ago post Hey, you t-t-t- talkin' 'bout My g-g-g-generation? the disparagement of the Boomer generations. This book is the one alluded to in that post, and I refer to the fictional couple Carter and Jayne. Like a lot in this book, it's hard to tell if the political opinions belong to the author herself, or are just part of the characterization and the general discussion of economics, important to the storyline, throughout it.
The animosity toward Carter and Jayne, along with their whole g-g-g-generation has partly to do with the economic situation. They and their cohorts are seen as selfish and (not sure from the reading) a part of what caused the economic downfall that is the subject of the whole book. Again, this is possibly just Miss Shriver's prognostication of what 10-15 years-hence Americans will think of that crowd. If she's gonna write this stuff though, I gotta nitpick again on the names, because, dammit, couldn't she have picked Boomer names for the Boomer couple, not ones that are used by the Millennial generation for THEIR children? Peak Stupidity has a real bug up our collective ass about these last-name first names that have been picked for kids, I'd say, up through 15 years old now and still coming (see "I should have named him after a man of the cloth" and elsewhere). "Carter" would, in fact, have been a good name for the 90-odd y/o patriarch, as it sounds like one from that era, and his Boomer son, along with his wife with the modern "Jayne" spelling should have regular old names, Doug, Bill, Sam, Harry, Sally, Dick, and yes, Jane, but spelled right. Sorry for the rant, but it just seems like the author is not on the ball with this stuff.
What the author nailed pretty well with the 2 Boomers, however, is that Carter and Jayne insist their grandchildren (4th generation) call them those names rather than Grandpa and Grandma. That is one trait that the book delves into, that the Boomers refuse to believe they have become old. It is kind of a running theme.
Speaking of names some more, the 3rd-book-generation daughter Avery has a teen-age daughter Savannah, very appropriate still for being born in book year 2014 or so. She and her husband Lowell have 2 boys named Goog and Bing. Yes, I get it, people really loved their search engines. Too bad there wasn't another baby boy named Duck. Seeing as Lowell is an economics professor, very appropriately for this book, as I'll get into later, he should have named them Maynard and Friedrich. The latter would be the one he'd whip daily, I guess - you'd understand if I'd explained this guy's economic stance throughout the book.
OK, as to the story now, Florence seems to be the main character of the book when you first start reading, and the story starts with the family life of her, her partner Esteban, and their son Willing (I don't know). Esteban is Hispanic, obviously, who are called "Lats" in 2029 ... terminology. It's probably a pretty good extrapolation to have the Lats be a big influence in America by this time, barring President Trump doing his job, but there are a few things I'd argue with right away. The story has them being a big part of the American power structure, as the new President is a Lat no, not Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho*, but President Alvarado.
That whole Lat thing doesn't really click. From what I read often on Steve Sailer's blog, other than the few La Raza trouble-makers, the Hispanics in America are kind of apolitical. They don't vote in numbers close to their share of America's population (if they did, we'd be in even worse trouble ...) Yet, they were supposed to be running things in the late 2020's... nah.
As we meet the small family of Estaban, Florence, and their 13 y/o boy Willing, we find that they are living in a very small house in Brooklyn, NY in an economically-decaying America. The gray water from the shower must be used for washing dishes, showers must be quick and are rationed, the meals are stretched thin, and both Florence and her partner work in low-paying service jobs. (Estaban's job** is taking rich old Boomers on expeditions into the wilderness, as they still want to pretend they are young.) The fact that Florence went to a fancy Ivy League school for some humanities degree that she doesn't use working at the homeless shelter makes her a bit envious of her sister Avery, with her therapy practice and Econ. professor husband Lowell. The deal is that all Americans except many of the rich Boomers are getting behind, though, and the country is slowly breaking down (hmmm, no mention of the Lat's effect at all...) The 2nd and 3rd generation Mandible family member still keep the big inheritance money from "Great-Grand-Man" Douglas in mind.
America is slowly sliding into near-3rd world conditions economically - that's the impression given. There was also something called the "Stonage" that had happened 5 years before (the younger ones insist it's not Stone Age, but one word pronounced "stow-nidge") "The Day That Nothing Worked" was what the book called it, and the reader finds out later that the internet was down. That's pretty reasonable, that the internet going down could cause a lot of havoc in our complex society, to where it would take a long time to recover. In this novel, it seems there will be no complete recovery. Perhaps Miss Shriver really missed something,as she never did explain this "Stonage" later on in the book. It's the kind of story in which you find out things slowly sometimes. That's a good way to keep reader interest, but I'd have liked to see this event explained too. It could have fleshed out the author's take on how things got bad so quickly.
For a prepper, one would want to prepare for something like this, such as the EMP event that was the subject of the other prepper novel reviewed here, One Second After. Many who look into America's future see something like Brazil. The economy is half-assed, the country is full of people of varied ethnicities/race to where there is no trust, and things don't work well. (Again, there's nothing immigration-related in Lionel Shriver's take ...) That's a distinct possibility for us, but it's one that you really can't prep for, unless your plan is to bail out completely. Things just slowly turn worse and worse, and it's widespread and kind of hopeless.
That's the basic set up at the beginning of this book, and it's depressing enough. There's MORE, though! I want to get into the further economic happenings in this near-future America of the novel The Mandibles, with all its discussions by the characters, as if they were graduates students at a seminar, that very much apply to the lives of the characters. The novel comes up with much food for thought for preppers too. It's important because this stuff applies to real America. 2029 is right around the corner.
More on this book next week, but I'll try to mix in other posts too.
* From Idiocracy.
** Oh, and Esteban helps with the dishes and other housework. Haha, I don't think this lady knows completely of what she writes then. Even though he's a Lat born in America, the Hispanic men are kind of macho, and I really don't see this as any kind of believable thing in the future. It's just another small error in the book.
Posted On: Friday - January 17th 2020 11:04PM MST
In Topics:   Music
I thought I would have some sit-down posting time today, but it didn't happen. If anything at all tomorrow, I'd really like to continue reviewing The Mandibles, though there are plenty of other posts in my mind. Seriously, if you don't want to read about that book, you may want to check back in around middle of next week at the earliest. The reader could order it from Amazon (better yet, get it from the library) and read it, probably before Peak Stupidity is done writing about the interesting prepper thoughts and economics therein!
There's an online course I've got to finish on a deadline that will take up 2-3 hours a day for a whole week that'd be better spent commenting on stupidity. I can't steal any more time.
That was just my segue to this beautiful Gerry Rafferty song:
Stealin' time, I've been stealin' time,
but I don't feel guilty, cause the time was mine.
Vocals: Gerry Rafferty
Drums: Henry Spinetti
Keyboards/Moog: Tommy Eyre
Steel Guitar: Brian Cole
Bass Guitar: Gary Taylor
Electric Guitars: Hugh Burns
Acoustic Guitars: Micky Moody / Gerry Rafferty
String Machine: Graham Preskett
Tambourine: Glen Le Fleur
Have a good weekend, PSers!
No comments - Click here to start thread
Peak Constitutional Amendment
Posted On: Wednesday - January 15th 2020 8:18PM MST
In Topics:   History  Liberty/Libertarianism
The mention of Amendment XXVI on the national election voting age in this post brought to my mind this question: When did America reach the peak of our abilities to wisely Amend the US Constitution? There really haven't been very many good ones at all, have there?
The 1st 10 Amendments, as we all (SHOULD) know, are called the Bill of Rights. These were not actually amended to the document later, as per the process specified in the document itself. These 1st 10 were added during the original ratification process of the US Constitution, as requested by those who feared an out-of-control Federal Gov't. Psshawww! What were those anti-Federalists anyway, "Federophobics", with this crazy irrational fear?!
The anti-Federalists pushed for this Bill of Rights, with items I through X for damn good reasons, but even number X, here:
... was not clear enough to the later ignorant American citizens who dropped the ball in this American experiment*, especially when under the influence of those up to no good. So it probably didn't matter what these wise Founders put in those 10 items of the Bill of Rights in the long run. However, would the country have possibly stayed freer for longer, if the language for that further amendment process had not been inserted? I guess our Founders reckoned that 3/4 of the States could not be filled with fools. No, they weren't THAT wise.
This post is another intro. really, as I'd like to go over some of those latter 17 Constitutional Amendments, trashing them one by one. No, we're not gonna' run out of material here for a long while ...
* For the ideas about States being "experiments" of their own, in democracy, see this long-forgotten (by me, anyway) post "The American Experiments in Democracy and SGTOW". That's States Going Their Own Way.
No comments - Click here to start thread
The Mandibles - Book Review - Introduction
Posted On: Wednesday - January 15th 2020 7:41PM MST
In Topics:   Preppers and Prepping  The Future  Books
It's not often a book review has to have an introduction, even on Peak Stupidity. However, this 2016 novel The Mandibles, as recommended by John Derbyshire, BTW, is one I have so much to write about. It will take possibly 3 to 4 more posts, just due to its relevance and interest to a blogger who likes to think a lot about economics lately. This post is the intro. to the book review.
The full title, is "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047", by Lionel Shriver. This is not what I'd call a dystopian sci-fi novel of the near future, as it doesn't involve any major changes in technology or world war and that. It's more of a story of the author's idea of a fairly-likely (IMO, too) future of America as based on our economic situation. It's very much a "prepper novel", with a different scenario than another one, One Second After (our review), but with no catastrophe involved. Though Peak Stupidity wrote our "about" page in a humorous fashion, I do think the peak of economic stupidity is coming, as "what can't go on, won't go on."* Peak Stupidity doesn't have but 10 posts, before this one, with our Preppers and Prepping topic key, but I am down with the idea.
The author wrote this book in '16, but now 2029 is only 9 years away, and Peak Stupidity aims to hold Lionel to it. I would personally not bet a single worthless (by the middle of the novel) Benjamin against her either!
Yeah, that's right, the author is a woman. First of all, the regular reader will know that I'm already sick of the naming conventions for kids these days. However, she is 62 years old. She doesn't even have the excuse that her parents were fans of funk and sappy soul music, as Lionel Ritchie wouldn't have been famous in 1957. My next guess was that Miss Shriver's Dad was one of those model railroad enthusiasts, of which there were a lot more back then (cool, cool stuff, that nobody seems to do anymore - there's an app, you see). No, I just read that Lionel Shriver picked out her first name at 15 years of age, changing it from Margaret Ann because she was a tomboy. OK, enough on that, whatever, that's no reason to put the book down.
I'll tell you what WAS, though - the first 10 pages or so. Please, if you do take what will be my enthusiastic recommendation for The Mandibles, don't get disgusted by the first little bit. I did. The story comes across as some left-wing stupidity, just based on the feminism and political situation discussed in the 1st "scene". However, I wondered "why in hell would John Derbyshire do this to me?" and picked it up again a week later. It turns out that Miss Shriver was describing the characters opinions, and different members of the Mandible family of characters had different opinions. The author's basic opinion of the economic ideas behind the story in the novel come out little by little and are clear by the end.
Because the book was written by a woman who seemingly took the same solid advice the foreward-writer Newt Gingrich gave to One Second After author William Forstchen - "write of what you know", the book has a female view on all the happenings going on during this semi-SHTF economic situation. Actually, maybe she was influenced also by Ernest Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises quote, to paraphrase "How did
One aspect of the book that I'm not impressed with is the author's use of conversation to convey ideas that ought to be just conveyed other ways, if possible. The problem is that NOBODY, but NOBODY has conversations like most of those between the characters in this novel. Sure, one character is a Professor of Economics, and, in the one scene with the dinner party of a few professors and wives, sure, I can see some of this. There is a precocious teenage boy who asks about the Federal Reserve and such. That's reasonable, but most of the conversations about economics, and lots of other topics for that matter, just do not represent anyone I've ever known's manner of talking. Even if Miss Shriver hangs out with the most intellectual crowd in all of Brooklyn, NY and London, England, her two homes, she's not gonna have conversations like these, except at dinner parties. By the the 2nd 3rd of this novel, nobody was having dinner parties.
(I kinda feel vindicated as a reviewer here. While looking on Wiki a few minutes back about one of Miss Shriver's other books, I noted: "The Guardian was more mixed, praising the "fast-paced exchanges" within the novel, but noting that she has a "tendency to rely too heavily on dialogue to explain complicated issues such as the workings of the US healthcare system or the intricacies of chemotherapy."". Yep, we intellectual book reviewers, ahem, are on the same page here.)
That is one flaw that makes the book a little bit hokey. However, the novel makes up for it very well by forecasting the doom that may very well await America due to its horrible financial situation. I want to bring up that other big flaw about this prepper novel, simply due to the author being a woman. Whether she's named Lionel OR Margaret Ann, it's no fault of her own - she wrote of what she knew., However, the woman's point of view is missing a whole bunch of prepping questions and answers that a man familiar with the actual world beyond family would be able to address better. That, and plenty of very small quibbles, will be discussed in the subsequent posts.
I'm going to try not to spoil the ending of this story until as late in these reviews as I can without missing my points. (I thought about using that "MORE" HTML tag, but I'm not sure.)
I'll say right now, though, that I highly recommend The Mandibles to all Peak Stupidity readers, but especially the preppers and/or economics buffs. You will enjoy it!
* I always have attributed this line to Instapundit Glenn Reynolds, Prof. of Law at UT(ennessee), but I don't know for sure.
Mr. Merkel, build up this Wall!
Posted On: Tuesday - January 14th 2020 6:45PM MST
In Topics:   Commies  Immigration Stupidity  Globalists  World Political Stupidity
33 1/2 years ago, President Ronald Reagan challenged Mr. Gorbachev, President of the USSR, to back up the words of the Commies about their great utopian economic system by tearing down the wall that kept East Berlin Germans from escaping to West Berlin. Not specifically because of Mr. Reagan's great speech, I assure you, only 2 years later this wall was torn down by the population of Berlin, as the USSR fell apart and its East Bloc captive countries were freed. This wall, built to keep people in, not out, had been up for 28 years. Well, right there, right then was a hell of a time to be on the right side of the Cold War and any side of the ruins of the Berlin Wall as a German.
Only 26 years later, Herr Merkel, Chancellor of the unified Germany, had already screwed over the German people by allowing over a million supposed refugee from Africa and the Middle East into the country. Though that's out of 83 million people, it's a big number than it sounds. As young men mostly, not really refugees at all, compared men of similar age who are actually German (subtract the 2 1/2 million Turks out), they could easily be 10% of them:
This is out of this demography:
There's no way anyone can call this some insignificant event in the history of Germany. This is a serious change in the make-up of the country, already changed somewhat in the Moslem direction by the idiotic importation of Turks since the 1960s to do the work that excellent German machinery could apparently not do.
A few days back, the indispensable Brenda Walker of VDare, informed us Germans Flee Diversity To Live In Monocultural Hungary. That's the reaction of many Germans who are told they can't even SAY anything about this grave threat to their population and culture, much less do anything. Some are getting the hell out and heading to another European country, ironically, one that had been in the East Bloc (albeit in a half-assed way). Mrs. Walker excerpts part of this article from the Christian Broadcasting Network, written by one Dale Hurd:
On Saturday the world celebrated the thirtieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which led to the reunification of Germany.The CBN article itself also says:
But what has Germany become? Not what some had hoped. And the proof of that can be found in Hungary, about two hours west of Budapest, at a place called Lake Balaton. Why mark the thirtieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall from a lake in Hungary? Because it’s where a lot of Germans have fled to who are fed up with Angela Merkel’s new Germany.
Germans Fleeing Migrant Crime
The Lake Balaton region is full of Germans who have moved here for all sorts of reasons, but a local real estate agent told us the biggest reason is migrant crime in Germany. ”At the moment our clients are 80 percent German,” Hungarian Real Estate Agent László Kozma told us, “And the main reason is the immigration problem in Germany.”
"It's getting worse than the situation in East Germany because we didn't have this," says German evangelist and author Heidi Mund, herself a former East German, "We didn't have this murder, we didn't have the rape."Yep, you've got your same old Commies, this time ostensibly working out of compassion for umpteen million "refugees" from the worst parts of the world. Nope, they don't read Marx and Engels and don't talk about the proletariat. They just want to destroy society. Oh, some of them were actual registered Commies before, such as Herr Merkel herself, having come across a few times even when there was a Berlin Wall and the larger-scale "Iron Curtain". She ought to know a little bit about walls.
But speaking out about migrant crime too forcefully in the new Germany can get you in trouble. Mund thought International Women's Day would be a good time to speak about the danger of migrant crime to all women. Only a heavy police presence prevented her from being physically attacked by West German leftists, who spat on her and called her obscene names.
This is why some are calling today's Germany "East Germany 2.0." Because just like in East Germany, certain ideas are enforced, either by society or the government, and those who deviate from political correctness could lose their jobs, or even face criminal action by the state.
These Germans (the article doesn't have numbers, unfortunately) that have been immigrating to Hungary know one thing: Hungary does have walls, at least working border fences anyway. "Mr. Orban, don't fuck with that wall!"
No comments - Click here to start thread
One more dig at Senor Fredrico Reed
Posted On: Tuesday - January 14th 2020 11:27AM MST
In Topics:   General Stupidity  Immigration Stupidity  Websites  Pundits
I don't know why I bother with this guy (above). He's just a pundit that used to be well-known on the web for his insightful and curmudgeonly "FredOnEverything" site. It's just that Peak Stupidity doesn't like hypocrisy. This guy has been an ex-pat down in Ole' Mexico for more than a decade. That sounds like not too awful a plan for a single guy, but it's his current "reporting" on America and Americans that irks the crap out of me.
Though I've written all this before in two back-to-back columns a year and a half ago titled Fred Reed's Lifelong Siesta" (Part 1 and Part 2), I'd just gotten back to checking out his column on unz.com as a bad habit and using the very user-friendly comments section to tear him another new one for this crap:
I don’t think a single commenter on here was criticizing Fred Reed for high-tailing it to Mexico, Jeff [an ex-pat commenter in the Far East]. The criticism is for his being a raving hypocrite. With all his criticisms, written before, during, and after, his trip, Mr. Reed, lives off American money that is still worth a lot down there (not forever, though!), came to America to get health care that apparently couldn’t be obtained in Old Mexico, and then based his views of America from a visit to Washington, FS, spent apparently watching TV most of the time.I should quit, but giving these anti-Americans writers a piece of my mind is cathartic, whatever that means. See, unz.com seems to have a lot of writers that are just plain anti-ANYTHING-American lately. I completely agree with the erudite factual criticisms of the US Feral Gov't, the warfare state, and all of that. Some of these guys, though, just sound like propagandists for the old USSR or the Caliphate of some towelhead out in the Middle East.
Fred Reed likes to take both sides of every argument against every problem:
[Fred Reed mode] America is decaying. There is no unified American culture anymore. There are lots of people mixed together from all over the world. There are bad ignorant Americans that are trying to prevent people from coming in from all over the world. Things don’t work well anymore. The new foreigners are better than those ignorant foreigner-hating Americans at working. America has changed for the worse from back when I was a kid when it was 90% white.
Trump is a clown. The TV news that I watch all day is full of people criticizing the President for everything and making fun of him. TV sucks. Americans should see how bad their country is on the TV. Trump wants a wall built. Bad ignorant Americans want a border barrier built. Walls don’t work. Americans just don’t want we Mexicans to assimilate and exchange bodily fluids with them. Mexicans don’t want to assimilate and be part of the crass, new, sick American culture that I watch on TV. Mexican culture is better and we have great engineering schools and gated communities. Mexico is better, so Mexicans don’t want to go to America. There is no need for a wall, but they don’t work anyway. Bodily fluids! [/Fred Reed mode]
If it weren't for the brilliant, snarky, and prolific Steve Sailer, the thoughtful gentlemanly numbers guy "Audacious Epigone", some occasional Paul Kersey, and the columnists such as John Derbyshire, Pat Buchanan, and Ron Paul, I wouldn't bother with that site anymore. Peak Stupidity doesn't have time to rip Fredrico a new one on a bi-weekly basis - there is too much other stupidity to cover. I'll write those posts about some great VDare writing later on.
No comments - Click here to start thread