I was taking the bus to a friend's place in northeastern Toronto on Friday
evening, with my guitar,
to get started on the pre-production for my album. (He'll be producing and
playing secondary guitar parts on it.)
Missed my stop, got off at the next one, and started walking back west,
minding my own business.
And ahead, at a bus stop, there's a black guy standing on the snowbank, looking
out into traffic as he waits for the bus.
He starts yapping as I approach ... then shuts his mouth
as I hurry by ... and then starts up again when I'm ten yards past.
So he was either just bitching at traffic and the don't-try-to-set-your-watch-by-them
buses which run intermittently here ... or he's a worthless, racist nigger coward
who lacks even the guts to dis a scrawny "whitey" to his face.
That's sad, isn't it—to even have to consider the latter option?
But what am I supposed to do? All I want is to be
allowed to walk down the street without being crapped on because of the
color of my skin. And that's the one thing which the average nigger just
won't let me do. (Okay, maybe not the "average" one ... but then, given that
the average mammy has an IQ of 85, maybe "average" is indeed accurate. Scary thought.)
From my perspective, if you're old enough to die for your country in
war, you're old enough to drink; and if you're too stupid to be allowed
into the army to protect your country, you're too stupid to vote, or at least
too stupid to have your vote be counted as much as any competent person's
vote counts for.
And daily life in the civilized world in the twenty-first century is less complex
than the army? So, even if you're too pig-fucking stupid to be allowed into the
army, you could still be functional in the civilian world, and contribute valuable
work to it, or at least pull your own weight in it?
So, like equally low-IQ whites
(who at least still have a redneck sense of responsibility
and punctuality, and a culture of "hard work," most of which nevertheless could and
should be done by machines instead), they're literally fit to
do nothing but dumbfuck manual labor. (Where are the cotton fields when you need
'em, eh?) The difference is just that only around one-sixth (I think) of whites
are that dumb, while more than half of niggas are too stupid to contribute
anything of value to twenty-first century civilization. Take heart, though: since there are
many more whites than blacks in North America and Europe, there are still numerically
more whites who are too stupid to live in the civilized world, than there are blacks.
Of course, that will
change for the worse, as the "oppressed" jungle bunnies and 'spics outbreed us whiteys over
the coming decades ... until they have the numbers to vote themselves whatever
"nigger/wetback perks" they want. "Goodbye Western civilization ... hello Third World.
Hope ya like tacos and fried chicken."
I had to laugh a couple of months ago, when blacks in California voted
overwhelmingly against gay marriage, and then gays were out at rallies
throwing the n-word around. I think it's good for blacks to have another
"oppressed group" doing that to them—a group which (like the hippies)
never harmed them in the least, always stood up for black rights in
a foolishly assumed solidarity ... and then got
totally shafted by a bunch of illiterate dumbfucks with no
wish for "justice for all," beyond their own primitive, homophobic in-group tribes.
(Yes, there were plenty of
other groups that voted comparably in the majority against gay
marriage. But even a cursory glance will disclose that none of those other groups have been fighting for
civil rights for other oppressed minorities over the past decades, with an implicit expectation of
"tit for tat" support in their hour of need. You're gay, and you really thought that "we're all in
this together, in the fight against oppression"? Duh.)
Someday the dumbcunt feminists will figure all of that out, too—that the "oppressed
black people" they've been protecting with mindless, hysterical political
correctness, are part of one of the most misogynistic cultures on the face
of the planet. Won't that be fun to see?! How the fur will fly, when they
finally manage to pull their heads out of their monologuing vaginas long enough
to see the bloody obvious....
Ever listen to hip-hop, ya dumb bitches/ho's? Do you really think it's all just
in fun, or just done for effect? If you really do still think that ...
you deserve exactly what you get from those violent,
dismally racist/sexist savages.
There's a 15-point IQ difference between whites and blacks in North America.
Some portion of that difference is genetic, and the rest is cultural.
For the genetic component, there's nothing you can do about it, and you're a
"racist" for even mentioning that it exists. And for the
cultural part, any attempts to get blacks to be punctual, respectful,
and studious, equates to trying to make them "white" and robbing them of their
"culture," and thus proves you to be a
"racist." So the only way to bridge the gap in income (which is correlated with IQ)
between whites and blacks is to give the latter free money, either in the form of
social programs or outright reparations for the suffering of ancestors they
never knew, and probably can't even name.
When you give equal opportunities to two groups that are, at the very least, not
even remotely culturally equal, you cannot expect equal outcomes. D'uh.
P.S. I know, I know: "It's funny how the 'best race' always ends up being the one
that the author is already a member of, isn't it?" Except that I'm neither Ashkenazi
Jewish nor Asian, both of which have higher average IQs than do North American whites
like myself—an astonishing
full standard deviation (i.e., 15 points) higher, in the case of the Ashkenazi Jews.
Funny how that works, isn't it? I mean, that there have been
selection pressures in
the past which have made the Ashkenazi Jews (on average) a
genetically superior race, in terms of intelligence. Just be thankful that their
"chosen people" complex has just been used as a defense against persecution, rather than
as a reason to oppress others.
Also, note that any disenfranchising (re: voting, etc.) of Really Stupid People
would affect numerically more whites than blacks. So it should be okay, right? At least,
I've seen that in
defending black homophobia in that recent California vote, it was common for
"non-racist" gays to note that more whites (or whatever group) than blacks voted
against gay marriage; so therefore, blacks shouldn't be blamed for the defeat.
It's all about raw numbers, not percentages, you see? At least, it is when you
want it to be; and when you don't want it to be, it's not. Right? Right!
Oh, and here's the other thing: there are blacks who say that "If you call one black a
nigger, you're calling us all niggers." Well, that's a nicely tribal way of thinking,
in which the in-group/tribe is defined solely by skin color.
And there's necessarily a corresponding out-group to that, for anyone
who doesn't have the same color of skin. And, like all out-groups,
its members will be seen as being inferior to the people in the in-group; that's just
how in-groups and out-groups always work.
So, "scratch a 'call one of us a nigger, you're calling us all niggers'" black, and
you know what you'll find? Yep: A raging jigaboo racist.
P.P.S.
Barack The Magic Negro. And the real effects of
colonialism on Africa:
[T]hose in the know will tell you that colonialism put a temporary halt to these long-standing conflicts
and was the reason why Africa was economically far more prosperous under colonialism than before or since after.
Essentially colonialism (and its neo- versions such as Rhodesia's UDI and Apartheid) disciplined blacks into a
western style economic order instead of letting them roam around and kill each other. It made them build roads
and dams and till fields instead of cutting out each other's testicles....
I grew up on politically incorrect stories of missionaries in cooking pots and the derring do of the thin red line
against fuzzy wuzzy. Frankly, recent events in Africa simply confirm the stereotyping....
In a sense, South Africa is
Rwanda [i.e., black-on-black genocide, tribe against
tribe] on a much larger scale and in much slower motion.
And, if you're wondering what happens without colonialists around to keep them A-fricans from eating each other....
And yet it's "racist" to call them "savages"! Well, that's what they fucking are!! They're eating each other!!!
You can't get much more "savage" than that!!
P.P.P.S. Have I mentioned recently how much I admire
Ayaan Hirsi Ali,
Thomas Sowell,
Ward Connerly, and
John McWhorter? Just thought I'd bring it up. The
civilized world needs more people like them. Unfortunately, the low-IQ black
community has so few such thoughtful, caring, courageous people to contribute
to the world. If any of those four gentlemen/women ever ran for public office
(as Hirsi Ali did in the Netherlands), I'd vote for them without a second thought.
That surprises you? Why should it? I'm no racist; but I am a severe IQ-ist and
(Western) culturalist. That is, I have no doubt at all that
two-thirds of
the Western world's adult population cannot understand the basic issues
facing them at election time, both from psychological stage-of-development
and from simple IQ perspectives—in which case their votes should absolutely
not be given the same weight as that of people who can understand the world
around them. I also have no doubt whatsoever that "Western civilization" is
the best en masse thing that our world and species has ever produced, and
that other cultures have value only insofar as they approximate the tolerance for
independence, individuality, (intellectual and economic-market) freedom, and the general
Enlightenment values upon which our civilized countries were founded. Anything less than
that is increasingly just a glorified sewer, whether African, ghetto, or otherwise.
And you know what else? Unless you think that even literally retarded persons should
be given a full democratic vote, when they cannot, in principle, understand the
issues they're voting on, you're an IQ-ist too. So, in principle, you're just as
awful as I am; it's just that you're satisfied to have the exclusionary
IQ-bar somewhere below 70, whereas
I'd move it up to at least 85. (Or, rather, I'd have a person's raw vote-value weighted by
something like percentile in IQ, combined with something like them having to
"recite the Bill of Rights verbatim before being allowed to vote," and also combined with
testing for psychological stage-development.)
You know what the alternative is, in just a few more fertile generations? A democracy
run by
illiterate, "entitled," violent blacks, macho wetbacks,
misogynistic, goat-fucking, pedophile-worshipping Muslims ... and braindead,
homophobic white rednecks.
In all seriousness, the world would be better off without them.
What's that you say? "All life is sacred, and worth preserving"? But you
didn't feel that way yesterday at dinnertime, when you sat down to eat that
thick, juicy steak.
(Animals, like children, can't enter into contracts; that's why
having sex with animals is wrong, right? Oh, but wait: Animals can't agree
to be bred and slaughtered for their meat, either; and murder is worse than
rape ... so meat-eating is obviously worse than bestiality. Bon appetite.)
So "all human life is sacred," then?
In which case assassinating Hitler would presumably have been as much of a crime as killing
Einstein? (Albert did actually have a $5000 price on his head from the Nazis, you know.)
No, you don't think so? You think there's a hierarchy of value, topped by
those people who do the most for the betterment of the world around them? Yes, my point
exactly: the life of an Einstein is worth more than the "elongated large intestine,"
animalistic existences of thousands of cocksure-dumbfuck rednecks.
(Note: If you support the death penalty—as I do, and as Einstein himself
actually did too, with the caveat that he didn't trust human beings to competently
execute [har!] it—you've already implicitly accepted the worst of these ideas,
just with a different "threshold." That is, you've already accepted that
there are indeed people whose life is so un-sacred that the world would literally
be a better place if they were dead. Well, that's all I'm sayin', too....)
Ant colonies, where the behavior of every worker is given equal value in regulating
the life of the colony, function as marvelous examples of "emergent," collective
intelligence?
Yeah, but that only works because all ants are about equally "intelligent." If there
were significant differences in intelligence from one ant to the next,
then colonies which gave more weight
to the decisions of the smarter insects would be more successful than any merely
"democratic" groups would be. Because what happens in any democracy is that the stupidest
and least-informed ten percent of the population cancels out the smartest and most-informed
ten percent at the voting booth, leaving you
with just the middling "average" voters to control the direction of the country.
I, personally,
have no qualms whatsoever about "disenfranchising" our world's bullying, animalistic
savages—people who never grew up out of a junior-high-school mentality where
gentleness in others is taken as a sign of weakness, to be exploited mercilessly, and
who are pathetic "boys" even while imagining themselves to be adult men and women.
On the contrary, excluding such worthless dumbfucks from making a bigger mess of
the world than they already have is the only way to save Western
civilization from the effect of their redneck-and-worse cultures. Well, that and
the
eugenics which will be widespread
in just a few more generations, which will very effectively remove
such shit-for-brains, two-digit-IQ animals from the world ... or create a subgroup of
back-to-the-land people who insist on reproducing the "old-fashioned way,"
and who thus consign their children to low-IQ lives in which they're able neither
to compete nor contribute to the world, and are thus of no
use to anyone (and where they also won't have the numbers to vote handouts to
themselves, so they're truly fucked).
"But democracy is so ... it's ... it's ...." It's what? "Divinely revealed"?
It's what we've grown up with, so we naturally think it's the only/best way of
doing things. As pathological as much of the corporate world is,
if you tried running a corporation in the same way as you run a "democratic"
country—giving
the same say in how the company is run to the high-school-dropouts in the
mailroom as you give to the smarter, educated ones higher up—you'd run it
into the ground faster than you can say "Donald Trump."
(It's not that even the janitors don't occasionally come up with good ideas
outside of their "professional field," as they did at Disney when low-level
employees were invited to contribute ideas for the animated cartoons.
But even if you're offering employees part ownership of the company, and thus giving
them a lot of incentive to want to see the company do well,
the more-complex issues facing the corp. will be ones
which two-thirds of them do not merely lack the training to understand, but
rather lack the cognitive development to comprehend even in principle.
"It's no basis for a system of government," that's for sure: If you cannot, in
principle, understand the issues, your opinion doesn't matter, and you sure
as hell shouldn't be given a vote on the subject, in any context.)
What you ideally want, in running a country, is to let the people who have
accomplished the most have the greatest say in how the country is run.
That is, you want to run it as a
meritocracy. But there are at least two
obvious reasons why you can't simply equate accomplishments with money earned.
First, there are many vital contributions to the betterment of the world which don't
pay even peanuts (for example), and which thus won't show up in any
financial evaluation of the worth of a person's life. And second, there's the
"Paris Hilton effect," where vacuous bimbos/jimbos are born ass-backwards
into money, having done nothing to earn that. What you want instead is
to give people's opinions a weight in proportion to what they would have
accomplished, had all other things been equal.
So what's the single best predictor of achievement and success in the world?
Yep: IQ. Where there's a 15-point difference between whites and blacks in
North America. Bummer, eh?
Oh, and there's again a similar IQ gap between Ashkenazi Jews and whites like
myself. I suppose recognizing that makes me a "Jewish supremacist" and an
"anti-white racist" now, eh? 'Cause,
y'know, I do consider them to be, on average, genetically superior in
intelligence to my own race. Not to me personally, of course, just to
the pasty-ass dumbfucks around me. On average.
I still think that his view of a Perfect World is
an infantile Robin Hood-like one in which money must be taken from the
rich (i.e., whitey and Hymie) and given to the poor (i.e., blacks and other minorities who
have done nothing to deserve it except to be poor, lazy, disrespectful, violent,
un-punctual ["white European value"],
and literally too sub-85-IQ-stupid to ever contribute anything of value to a world
which would truly be better off without them, just as it would be better off without
dumbfuck white rednecks who never outgrew their junior-high-school bullying/homophobic
mentalities). But if that's all it is ... it could be
worse.
I'm also curious to see what he does about his promise for an "open borders"
policy within his first 100 days in office. It's the stupidest thing a leader could
do to a First World country; but that doesn't mean I'd be above taking advantage of the
ability to work in the U.S., outside of the constraints of NAFTA.
Back in the middle of November, I was having a few pints on a Friday evening
in a local pub. Nearby, at the end of the bar, a stereotypically drunk,
thirty-something First Nations
(i.e., Native American) man was going on about how the White Man had stolen
"his land" from him.
The cute blond, Polish bartender was playing along with that, accusing me
(with my German/Russian [Mennonite] roots) of "stealing" sauerkraut from
"her people," which
was good for a genuine laugh. (Hey, if she wants that food back, she's welcome
to it!) But overall I wasn't interested in listening to
the Injun in question.
Unfortunately, that didn't stop him from coming over to me later, shaking my
hand, and asking me:
Uh-huh. Well, aside from the fact "us Anglo-Saxons" (and Jews) are responsible for, oh,
say 95% of the best aspects of Western civilization, Tonto: If "your people" still
had "your land," what would you do with it? Obvious answer: Sell it to whitey
(does Manhattan ring a bell?),
blow the money on booze, and in a decade or two you'd be
back in exactly the same situation as you're in now, maybe just with a few more
casinos to show for it.
Then, around three weeks ago, I was rushing east on the subway to an appointment
in Scarborough (Toronto's most infamously violent suburb) after a very
stressful afternoon of webmastering without an Internet connection set up
in my new apartment.
The city was in the middle of a blizzard, so the buses were all backed up,
and there was a single-file line all the way up to the top of the stairs and into
the station for the one I needed to get on, for the last leg of my journey.
If I had been even one minute late getting to where I needed to go,
it would have cost me $200. So I did something I've never done before
in my life: I tried to cut in line, following a black woman down the
stairs who was doing exactly the same thing.
When I got down to the platform, I saw a nineteen-year-old black kid looking
right at me, but I didn't make too much of it.
No sense being paranoid about every little nigga who's staring at you, right?
So finally, after waiting there in the cold for a good five minutes or so,
a bus pulled up ... with another one right behind it. I hesitated—the
second bus would be less crowded, but might also sit there idling for
another ten minutes. Then I headed for the rear doors of the first bus.
After moving forward a bit as a few people got on, the double-file line was oddly
at a standstill, so I jumped up into the bus ...
only to find my path suddenly blocked by the black guy standing to my right.
I backed up, to allow him to get on, but he just stood there, so I moved
forward again ... at which exact time he too tried to get on, intentionally
moving into my path and deliberately making contact with (i.e.,
assaulting) me again.
Him: You going somewhere? The line starts up there.
So I backed off again, and got a nice spot in the next bus instead—which,
thankfully, didn't sit there idling at all.
Of course, the jungle-bunny criminal in question had no problem at all
with the black woman who was doing exactly the same thing as I
was doing. So the problem wasn't that I was simply cutting
in line, it was rather that I was a white male who was doing that: His
"sistahs" were obviously welcome to do the very same thing, without fear
of reprisal. After all, they've been so "oppressed by whitey," etc.
Little racist nigger. With a heavy
Afrikangibberish accent, too, meaning that he certainly wasn't born in my
country, and should really go back to whatever-the-fuck worthless Dark-Continent
sewer he crawled out of. ("Your line starts in Africa, monkey-boy. Where's
your organ-grinder?")
I'm kidding, of course: I know they don't have sewers where that little shit-colored,
racist savage came from. Hell, they don't have anything of value where he came
from. That's why he's here, stinking up my civilized country.
A week later, I was heading back home at the tail end of the morning rush hour,
through the same station. Paid my fare, walked through the turnstile, and
saw another late-teenage black kid coming down the stairs in my direction. I crossed to the
other set of stairs, well in front of him ... and then, just as I passed
by him, looking in the other direction, he muttered a couple of words in
Afrikangibberish.
Doubting that he could have been directing those dumbfuck mutterings at me, I
glanced back ... to see him looking back at me, too. So yeah, whatever-the-fuck
this moronic Buckwheat was gibbering on about, it was meant for me.
Fo shizzle, my illiterate, ebonic nizzle.
So, unless that was the same racist shit-stain who was hassling me for
cutting in line—I didn't get a close look at the little coon,
and anyway, you know how all them niggies look alike—the only reason
he could have been hassling me out of the blue was, again, for the color
of my skin.
You let animals into your living room, and it's no surprise if they shit all
over the carpet. And what we're doing with our immigration policies in
North America is to stupidly invite the carpet-soiling culture of the
Third World into the closest thing our species has ever known to civilization,
thinking it will enrich us, when it will instead destroy us. Because when it
comes to racism (and anti-Semitism), whitey ain't got nothin' on them
carpet-staining
blacks (and wetbacks, and Muslims, and
wetback-Muslim-goatfuckers; and worst of all,
black Muslims—the world's worst culture, and the
world's worst religion, combined to produce something truly vile, reprehensible, and
unredeemable).
The slaves were
freed in the States because, deep down, us palefaces are
on average decent people, with a Christian sense of morality and responsibility
(however much it may be based on fairy tales which happen to encode many
things which have cultural survival value).
There is no such sense of decency among magical-thinking, animistic
savages, whose
worldview is overwhelmingly based on
blaming others for their own problems and
grave shortcomings, and who are being stupidly, stupidly encouraged to
preserve their own
near-worthless tribal cultures in the civilized world, in the
name of multiculturalism:
Whereas individual responsibility in a world of individuals is central to
modern ethics, the blurry environment of old-time communal [i.e., tribal]
life provided a
thousand excuses for evading responsibility. Sometimes this took the form of
hiding behind the mysteries of causation. In the traditional Polynesian world,
for example, there was no clear place for personal responsibility when things
went wrong—culpable acts could always be explained away by sorcery, witchcraft,
or fate. At other times group solidarity was invoked. A malefactor would be
shielded by his family, his clan, his tribe, his confederation, always on the
solidary basis that as "one of us" he could do no wrong.
At the ethical center of both tribalism and totalitarianism was the ideal
of unity, of conformity, of groupthink carried to a point where the interests
of the individual barely existed.
Even the whole penchant for blacks absurdly embracing Christianity is part
of the same primitive,
magical worldview. I had an aunt who worked as a missionary in Panama for
many decades. The missionaries there, in accord with their lives of sympathetic "poverty,"
would wear plain white shirts—it was the least "luxurious" option available
to them. To the backward,
cargo-cult natives, however, seeing all the power, medicine,
technology and "wealth" that the missionaries had, those same shirts were highly coveted
items: The missionaries' power obviously came from the clothes
they were wearing!
For exactly the same primitive reasons, two-digit-IQ toms
all the way up to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson want to get in on the
benefits of the White Man's God, even when verses from the same Bible have
been used to justify their ancestors' enslavement! You'd have to be utterly
pre-rational and fucked-in-the-head, of course, to follow such an idiotic
path. Yet they swarm to it like flies to milk-and-honey.
(Or why do you think these mammies would give up their
animistic religions in favor, specifically, of Christianity? It ain't for
preserving their "valuable" African traditions, that's for sure!)
These primitive, racist sambos genuinely believe (with our foolish
complicity) that if they had only been given the same
privileged shake in life as "whitey" supposedly has, they'd have
the same amount of "cargo." In reality, however, if it wasn't for
European contact and colonialism, blacks
in Africa would still be literally
cannibalizing and crucifying
each other, even while sitting on mounds of gold and diamonds. (And how do
you think they would have gotten those assets out of the ground, had
that task been left up to them? Yep: By whatever slaves they could get their
hands on from neighboring tribes or from the pirated [i.e., stolen and
enslaved] ships of civilized countries.)
Personally, I would go so far as to say that European contact and colonization
was the best thing that ever happened to Africa (and
India). Not that there wasn't brutal
racism expressed from the whites to the native savages. (Yes, that is what they
were, and to a large extent still are: savages.) It's just that their own culture
was (and is) so brutally oppressive
not only to women but to anyone outside (and even inside) of their tribal
in-groups, that you could hardly make it any worse.
And if you naïvely think that, were the roles to ever be reversed,
blacks would free their white slaves ... just take a
gander over at that shit-stain on the ass of the world,
Zimbabwe. How's it working out for the (murdered) white farmers
over there? (Ooh, and a cholera
epidemic too, now. Serves the stupid jigaboo-racist criminals right.
'Cause why wasn't that a problem when the higher-average-IQ whites over there had a greater
say in how the country was run? When people happily eat and drink their own shit,
there isn't much else they won't do.)
Picture a population of dumbfuck, violence-prone,
too-stupid-and-prejudiced-to-vote rednecks with no use for education ...
but also with no culture
of work or responsibility, and a through-the-roof sense of entitlement
and paranoid feeling of persecution ... and black skin. That, right there, is
the culture and worldview of the average Aunt (and Uncle) Jemima.
And it's "all whitey's fault," isn't it?
You want to know how them niggas would treat us whiteys if they were ever
in the majority? Aside from the savages in Zimbabwe, consider Howard Stern's
experiences in high school on Long Island:
If Stern had turned into a "Columbine killer" from that, he would have been
completely justified, and should have been found "not guilty" just for
reasons of basic human compassion. The later
movie about Stern's life did indeed
"glos[s] over his use of sexual and racial humor." More relevantly, though,
it left out the racism perpetrated against Stern by those
shithead-racist, savage blacks he had to deal with growing up—violent abuse
which he had done nothing to incite except to be born with the "wrong"
color of skin.
If us palefaces had really wanted to exterminate the Injuns or the niggas,
they'd be long gone. (Likewise, if the U.S. was really an imperialist nation,
they'd own the world many times over—just being the first country to develop
the atom bomb would have guaranteed them that.) But ironically, due to
multiculturalism and intermarriage,
it's the white race that will be the first to disappear. And not a moment
too soon, I'm sure, in the view of the imported and domestic
racist animals who won't
let a white man walk down the street, or have a beer, without hassling him
just for the color of his (i.e., my) skin.
P.S. No, I won't be giving away the best of my ideas for free in the future.
Not to people who lack the
basic decency
to say "thanks" for a valuable service, given freely.
You want my sparkling ideas? Then pull out your wallet, or do without them,
'cause I will still write that book about the paleolithic origins of religion,
someday. (No, there won't be an eBook option, just hardcover followed by
paperback.) And right now, I'm the only one in the whole wide world who
really understands where it all comes from. Either way, you already know
that you're not gonna find the best of my thoughts anywhere else.
It's not natural or easy for me to be this selfish. But if I put my mind to
it, I think I can manage it. After all, the rest of the world does....
