The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Affirmative Opposition to Racial Favoritism
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Even Californians shot down a proposition to allow institutions more latitude in using race to make hiring, firing, and acquiring decisions. If immigration was the electoral $100 bill lying on the sidewalk in 2015, opposition to race preferences is the one lying there today. Support for it is limited primarily to blue checkmarks and their followers on twitter. A poll taken last week shows only a plurality of Democrats and nothing close to a majority of anyone else favors race-based college admissions:

From GSS data collected over the course of the Great Awokening on racial preferences in hiring:

Preferential hiring based on gender* enjoys relatively more popular support:

The pool of potential beneficiaries when the preference is based on gender rather than on race is larger. The potential beneficiaries are a numerical majority, in fact. And while a white man may not have a close non-white person in his life who might benefit from race-based preferences, he has a mother, daughter, or wife who potentially will.

The failure of Prop 16 in California last November presages an impending shift in the American discourse on civil rights. Civil rights have historically been viewed by white identitarians as a hostile force. They’ve historically viewed the Civil Rights Act of 1965 as an assault. We’re now at a point where the Act will act as a break on the most extreme impulses of people like those who pushed the failed California proposition.

Over the course of his prolific career Steve Sailer has been fond of trying to predict what the next civil rights struggle will be. It was race and sex in the past, homosexuality more recently, and then transgenderism. The pool of the putatively oppressed has been reduced to a fraction of a fraction of the population to such an extent that scarcely anyone remains. But the impulse is there, and as crazy as it sounds in The Current Year, whites will become the beneficiaries of some of it as the systematic oppression of the most vulnerable and unprivileged of them intensifies.

Modest rhetorical suggestion: Democrats are the real racists does have utility, but not if the emphasis is on their alleged antagonism towards blacks or other minorities. Their racism is directed against whites in government bailouts, university admissions, hirings and promotions, etc. Do not bemoan that the things Democrats do benefit people of color. Criticize them for hurting whites and Christians and rustics. You don’t sell opposition to a thing by focusing on who it helps, you do it be focusing on the sympathetic people it hurts.

GSS variables used: AFFRMACT, FEJOBAFF, YEAR(2010-2018), SEX, RELIG(1-2,4-13), RACECEN1(4-10), HISPANIC(1), RACEHISP, PARTYID(0-1)(2-4,7)(5-6)

* I’d prefer to use the term “sex” but its use as verb makes a sentence dealing with preferential hiring a little trixie tricky**.

** Unbeknownst to me until just now, that joke lands in a different way than it used to. TERFs lose again.

 
Hide 51 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Democrats “do”, not “due”.

    As I mentioned on a different post recently, the most obvious, topical, and emotionally salient anti-white bias is from people who want elderly whites to die to vaccinate coloreds first. People are already primed to think about the Nursing Home Holocaust of 2020. No vaccines? To the gas chambers!

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    @Chrisnonymous


    anti-white bias is from people who want elderly whites to die to vaccinate coloreds first.
     
    This old Whitey will never be vaccinated, and neither will you if you know what is good for you. From my perspective, they can double and triple dose every Black before any White.
    , @Supply and Demand
    @Chrisnonymous

    I would prefer them to die in state-run de-radicalization camps — but only the 60+ who voted Trump. Using them as vaccine guinea pigs is pointless, Gates is trojan horsing this as a fertility wrecker.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

  2. How fascinating that there is a leftist bridge too far even for California.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Mr. Rational

    Maybe Leftism is the wrong word for the craziness we are witnessing? I don’t have a better one, BTW.

  3. The racial grievance industry is a gigantic gravy train that benefits a handful of blacks but predominantly a bunch of careerist HR and bureaucratic-type whites in government and education, and it’s all fueled by government spending and accommodative monetary policy. If we could shrink the government and stop the spending, like the old GOP used to pretend to want, there would be no “race issue.” Like the phony Covid-19 pandemic, the whole thing is just a McGuffin wherewith to rule, dominate, and spend.

    One of the many, many reasons why HBD is such a foolhardy endeavor is because it treats race as if it were itself the issue, as if everything was downstream from race. In fact, the whole racial hermeneutic is downstream from neoliberal economics. Turn off the money and the race problems sort themselves out.

    Remember when Daniel Patrick Moynihan spoke about “benign neglect”? He was exactly right. There is hardly a single problem in the Western world today which could not be improved simply by getting government to back out of it.

    • Agree: Brian Reilly, RoatanBill
  4. Let the Democrats get even more obsessed with race. Seriously. Let them. Don’t let campus freaks and media talking heads fool you. Most Americans do not have comprehensive theories of race, one way or another, and do not want to have politics dominated by the topic. Let the tone of the party become more schoolmarmish and moralistic. They’ll alienate more and more people. The Democrats are already the party of affluent liberals, more than anything else. Make them own that, combine it with a GOP willing to abandon zombie Reaganism, and you have your road back to the White House.

    One of the biggest problems the American Right traditionally has had was knowing when to sit back, crack open a cold one, and let the enemy put a big, fat noose around his neck. Don’t become more *like* the Democrats, don’t ape their talking points, and don’t play their game. Become a counterpoint.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @nebulafox

    “One of the biggest problems the American Right traditionally has had was knowing when to sit back, crack open a cold one, and let the enemy put a big, fat noose around his neck.”

    Paul Ryan’s favorite saying.

    , @Talha
    @nebulafox

    Very good points here.

    Peace.

  5. And when was the was the last time that you heard a GOP politician discuss this issue in an ad? Jesse Helms?

    A party only has so many winning cards- it ought to play the ones that it has.

  6. The Civil Rights Era was caused by virtue-signalers crystallizing around the seed of black identitarians, who were able to disguise their intentions to gain power by using the cloak of universalism. One man, one vote was calculated to give them more power.

    And, of course, there was Jewish support.

    It is not a formula that works for whites.

  7. Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Wyatt
    @Talha

    Islam is right about women.

    , @Rosie
    @Talha


    Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.
     

    I dunno, Talha. I sometimes wonder if some sort of affirmative action for on ramping mothers (or fathers, of course) might be just the thing that is needed. Veterans, for example, get preferential treatment in federal government hiring. That is a no-brainer, of course, and I don't think returning mothers have anywhere near as strong a claim to preference as combat Veterans, but the principle is the same.

    One criticism European feminists have of the American women's movement is that we have been too shy about asking for special favors in consideration of our special needs as mothers because of the negative associations with the "separate but equal" idea.

    I don't have a strong position either way, but I do think that the point is at least arguable, and I think that is what is behind the greater support for affirmative action for women, even among men, God bless them.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @Rosie
    @Talha

    BTW, Talha, I never answered your question about purses. Since they don't cause blisters, style is much more important with purses than shoes. Beyond that, I can't explain it. I've never been into the purse thing. I do understand it, though. If you gave me a whole closet to store vintage pyrex and other assorted tableware, I'd have it filled and color-coded just like this lady:

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/62/93/5062939e78c3266f5bc696a46dc3f3ad.jpg

    And don't laugh, this stuff can be worth lots of money if you keep it in good condition, though nowhere near as good an investment as designer bags!

    https://www.wideopeneats.com/vintage-pyrex-patterns/

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/lelalondon/2020/07/01/designer-handbags-are-now-a-better-investment-than-art/?sh=6c8e7c4b64c5

  8. A plurality of Democrats want racist college admissions. They seek to punish swathes of the population for their skin colour. In doing so, they are also dividing society through their bigotry and hatred. This is reflected in the openly and proudly racist standards by which Biden selected his VP. Again, he decided that much of the population was racially inferior and thus to be excluded. This systematic discrimination therefore starts at the top and has infected the entire party apparatus. the Democratic Party is institutionally and irredeemably racist. It must go. The above is open for all to see and even boasted about by their crusaders for racial hatred and intolerance.

    There is only racism, which is detailed above, and anti-racism, which is everyone who will make substantial sacrifices to oppose it. Those who won’t work and donate to opposition to the racist Democratic Party agenda are themselves racist, and they must be removed from power and influence so as to save society and the world from America’s original sin.

  9. Whether people disapprove of racial preferences or not the fact is college admission officers and corporate HR managers are going to use them. If they don’t negroes are going to disappear from the student bodies of elite universities and management positions in the economy and we all know that negroes won’t accept what their rightful place in the economic and social hierarchy allows them.

    Absent complete segregation some form of affirmative action is going to have to exist because consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one’s interest.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @unit472

    Under the law, all men are created equal, but some are more equal than others. Is that your contention?

    No law should single out any particular human trait. All laws should apply equally to all people. If a certain segment of the society is too ill equipped for certain occupations and educational opportunities, then they should gravitate towards those jobs and schools appropriate to their abilities. What is so wrong with becoming an electrician, plumber, bus driver, etc? Does everyone need a degree to function positively in the society?

    Why import people for farm labor when there are millions of welfare recipients that could easily replace them? Are the mentally challenged for white collar jobs and university too good for such labor? By pandering to that segment of the society that simply isn't equipped to succeed in certain areas you create a permanent underclass of takers that has the time on their hands to turn their resentment into crime. That's where the US is today - people are paid to live a life style that leads to crime and resentment.

    Replies: @Curmudgeon

    , @dfordoom
    @unit472


    Absent complete segregation some form of affirmative action is going to have to exist because consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one’s interest.
     
    I agree.

    Affirmative action is the price that has to be paid if you don't want social chaos. If you want to maintain a reasonably stable functional society there simply isn't a choice. It's worth paying a price for some degree of social peace. If you think things are bad now then they would be much much worse without affirmative action.

    One day the knuckle-draggers on the far right will have to accept that reality.

    And forget lunatic ideas like deporting 13% of the population. Even suggesting such insane ideas is the sort of thing that will discredit the Right even further.

    But the far right lives in a world of fantasy, hopelessly divorced from the real world.

    Replies: @Mr. Rational

  10. Whites aren’t hurt by affirmative action anymore. They were back in the 1980s when there was a surplus of overqualified whites, and when the majority of nonwhites were clinically retarded blacks, but those days are over. Today, whites are actually less qualified than they were back then, and ever since then there has been a major influx of overqualifed Asians from Asia, who are today the ones who carry the yoke of affirmative action.

    Furthermore, whites aren’t even competing for the same iobs as minorities, and remain by far the most regionally racially isolated group of people in the country.

    Thus, low support for affirmative action among whites is a cultural relic of the 1980s and 1990, reflecting a general stupidity and mental fog that whites are famous for. On the other hand, Asian’s relatively high support for affirmative action is truly perplexing. It may be that Asians, who actually have slightly lower verbal IQs than whites, are so socially retarded and autistic that they cannot understand how affirmative action is going to hold them back. They bought in to the Woke propaganda, much like white trashionalists bought in to David Duke’s anti-affirmative action propaganda back in the 1980s.

    • Replies: @Catdog
    @JohnPlywood

    Asians DO benefit from some forms of affirmative action. SBA grants and federal contract preference for example.

  11. consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one’s interest.

    Allowing that 13% to drag the rest down to the level of Haiti or the Congo isn’t in the 87%’s interest, but that’s what they’ll do if they stay here.

    Recolonizing that 13% to the Congo is in the 87%’s interest.

    • Agree: Realist, Adam Smith
  12. All college admission and job hiring should be done on merit only.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Realist


    All college admission and job hiring should be done on merit only.
     
    First you have to define merit.

    I'm sure a lot of people around these parts think that IQ is the measure of merit. It isn't, or at least it's not the only measure of merit.

    To give an example, I'd prefer to have honest cops rather than smart cops. I'd also prefer to have honest bureaucrats rather than smart bureaucrats.

    There are many jobs for which IQ or academic attainments are not the best measures of merit. Nursing for example. You can have a high IQ and be a lousy nurse because you just don't have the right personality type for the job. Another person might have a slightly lower IQ or slightly lower SAT scores or whatever but be an outstanding nurse.

    Replies: @Realist

  13. Lately I have been thinking that for the right to have any future at all, they have to be unabashedly pro-masculinity/trad family, as in highlighting their commitment to making sure ordinary/working class men have the economic opportunity to be independent and able to provide for a family. The left has gone in the other direction – waiving off the destruction of working class jobs with comments about learning to code or make solar panels and placing women far above men in the intersectional totem pole. Working class whites are dying earlier partly out of the despair generated by having a bleak economic future, black men are the only group that makes less than women of the same racial group and hate it, and Latinos are very traditional family oriented.

    A majority of people want the traditional social arrangements, but the left hates the supposed “patriarchy” and the right is too chicken to make the case for a return to a multi-culti version of 1950s America. Trump has many flaws, but his unabashed masculinity definitely was starting to move the needle a bit with groups that traditionally favor the Democrats. Shift the focus on this message and the racial crap will wither on the vine, and avoid directly fighting an issue that is essentially home court for the left.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @unit472
    @Arclight

    I agree and to cement the rights support among the working class we must aggressively support trade unions. Modern corporate America is all about destroying workers wages and rights through immigration and off shoring production.

    Imagine if America's truckers had a strong union to represent them. We know they lean right but are not organized. Give them a corruption free Teamsters Union to belong to and it would be the most powerful organization in the US. BLM and Antifa want to riot , the truckers could say fine but we don't deliver food or fuel to any city that cannot maintain order on its streets.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    , @JohnPlywood
    @Arclight

    The low fertility of the last 40 years in the developed world has nothing to do with economics or money. It is entirely due to the extreme selfishness and frigidity of our lower quality females, who do not want to reproduce but to have some kind of stupid career. The solution is never going to involve money or jobs, but military command, and also the importation of higher quality females to check the odious presence of developed world "females".

    , @anon
    @Arclight

    Lately I have been thinking that for the right to have any future at all, they have to be unabashedly pro-masculinity/trad family,

    But first they'll have to check with the wife the boss to see if it's ok or not.

  14. @Arclight
    Lately I have been thinking that for the right to have any future at all, they have to be unabashedly pro-masculinity/trad family, as in highlighting their commitment to making sure ordinary/working class men have the economic opportunity to be independent and able to provide for a family. The left has gone in the other direction - waiving off the destruction of working class jobs with comments about learning to code or make solar panels and placing women far above men in the intersectional totem pole. Working class whites are dying earlier partly out of the despair generated by having a bleak economic future, black men are the only group that makes less than women of the same racial group and hate it, and Latinos are very traditional family oriented.

    A majority of people want the traditional social arrangements, but the left hates the supposed "patriarchy" and the right is too chicken to make the case for a return to a multi-culti version of 1950s America. Trump has many flaws, but his unabashed masculinity definitely was starting to move the needle a bit with groups that traditionally favor the Democrats. Shift the focus on this message and the racial crap will wither on the vine, and avoid directly fighting an issue that is essentially home court for the left.

    Replies: @unit472, @JohnPlywood, @anon

    I agree and to cement the rights support among the working class we must aggressively support trade unions. Modern corporate America is all about destroying workers wages and rights through immigration and off shoring production.

    Imagine if America’s truckers had a strong union to represent them. We know they lean right but are not organized. Give them a corruption free Teamsters Union to belong to and it would be the most powerful organization in the US. BLM and Antifa want to riot , the truckers could say fine but we don’t deliver food or fuel to any city that cannot maintain order on its streets.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @unit472

    Give them a corruption free Teamsters Union

    I didn't realize you do comedy.

    , @dfordoom
    @unit472


    I agree and to cement the rights support among the working class we must aggressively support trade unions.
     
    That would be an extremely good idea.
  15. @unit472
    Whether people disapprove of racial preferences or not the fact is college admission officers and corporate HR managers are going to use them. If they don't negroes are going to disappear from the student bodies of elite universities and management positions in the economy and we all know that negroes won't accept what their rightful place in the economic and social hierarchy allows them.

    Absent complete segregation some form of affirmative action is going to have to exist because consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one's interest.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    Under the law, all men are created equal, but some are more equal than others. Is that your contention?

    No law should single out any particular human trait. All laws should apply equally to all people. If a certain segment of the society is too ill equipped for certain occupations and educational opportunities, then they should gravitate towards those jobs and schools appropriate to their abilities. What is so wrong with becoming an electrician, plumber, bus driver, etc? Does everyone need a degree to function positively in the society?

    Why import people for farm labor when there are millions of welfare recipients that could easily replace them? Are the mentally challenged for white collar jobs and university too good for such labor? By pandering to that segment of the society that simply isn’t equipped to succeed in certain areas you create a permanent underclass of takers that has the time on their hands to turn their resentment into crime. That’s where the US is today – people are paid to live a life style that leads to crime and resentment.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    @RoatanBill

    Good comment.


    Why import people for farm labor when there are millions of welfare recipients that could easily replace them?
     
    Because our corporatist society is big on bread and circuses. That means cheap food and distractions. If imported farm labor weren't available, wages would go up, not down, and food prices would go up. It may also mean that smaller farmers actually get paid what they deserve for their product. A lot more people at the lower end would have less to eat, which may make them "restless". Restless people have a bad habit of rocking the boat.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

  16. @unit472
    @Arclight

    I agree and to cement the rights support among the working class we must aggressively support trade unions. Modern corporate America is all about destroying workers wages and rights through immigration and off shoring production.

    Imagine if America's truckers had a strong union to represent them. We know they lean right but are not organized. Give them a corruption free Teamsters Union to belong to and it would be the most powerful organization in the US. BLM and Antifa want to riot , the truckers could say fine but we don't deliver food or fuel to any city that cannot maintain order on its streets.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    Give them a corruption free Teamsters Union

    I didn’t realize you do comedy.

  17. @Arclight
    Lately I have been thinking that for the right to have any future at all, they have to be unabashedly pro-masculinity/trad family, as in highlighting their commitment to making sure ordinary/working class men have the economic opportunity to be independent and able to provide for a family. The left has gone in the other direction - waiving off the destruction of working class jobs with comments about learning to code or make solar panels and placing women far above men in the intersectional totem pole. Working class whites are dying earlier partly out of the despair generated by having a bleak economic future, black men are the only group that makes less than women of the same racial group and hate it, and Latinos are very traditional family oriented.

    A majority of people want the traditional social arrangements, but the left hates the supposed "patriarchy" and the right is too chicken to make the case for a return to a multi-culti version of 1950s America. Trump has many flaws, but his unabashed masculinity definitely was starting to move the needle a bit with groups that traditionally favor the Democrats. Shift the focus on this message and the racial crap will wither on the vine, and avoid directly fighting an issue that is essentially home court for the left.

    Replies: @unit472, @JohnPlywood, @anon

    The low fertility of the last 40 years in the developed world has nothing to do with economics or money. It is entirely due to the extreme selfishness and frigidity of our lower quality females, who do not want to reproduce but to have some kind of stupid career. The solution is never going to involve money or jobs, but military command, and also the importation of higher quality females to check the odious presence of developed world “females”.

  18. @Arclight
    Lately I have been thinking that for the right to have any future at all, they have to be unabashedly pro-masculinity/trad family, as in highlighting their commitment to making sure ordinary/working class men have the economic opportunity to be independent and able to provide for a family. The left has gone in the other direction - waiving off the destruction of working class jobs with comments about learning to code or make solar panels and placing women far above men in the intersectional totem pole. Working class whites are dying earlier partly out of the despair generated by having a bleak economic future, black men are the only group that makes less than women of the same racial group and hate it, and Latinos are very traditional family oriented.

    A majority of people want the traditional social arrangements, but the left hates the supposed "patriarchy" and the right is too chicken to make the case for a return to a multi-culti version of 1950s America. Trump has many flaws, but his unabashed masculinity definitely was starting to move the needle a bit with groups that traditionally favor the Democrats. Shift the focus on this message and the racial crap will wither on the vine, and avoid directly fighting an issue that is essentially home court for the left.

    Replies: @unit472, @JohnPlywood, @anon

    Lately I have been thinking that for the right to have any future at all, they have to be unabashedly pro-masculinity/trad family,

    But first they’ll have to check with the wife the boss to see if it’s ok or not.

  19. Race based college admissions inevitably leads to race based grading to keep the black students from flunking out. That then increases race based hiring because employers use college degrees when they hire and many unqualified blacks get jobs just because they have a degree. Once in the job, they then get race based promotions.

    Finally, not very much talked about, is raced based firing. Black employees often deserve to get fired but don’t. I remember one time I was talking to my boss about firing a black employee who never showed up for work half the time and hadn’t been fired after three years. My boss looked nervously around and then said in a low voice that every time a black employee is fired management has to extensively document everything they did wrong and have an overwhelming case against them because the black employee always pulls out the race card and says they are being fired because they are black. She said a lot of management people don’t want to go through all the work, all the hassle, and all the accusations of racism so incompetent black employees are often left in place when a white person doing the same thing on the job would get let go.

    All forms of favoritism have a bad effect on employee morale. Every successful company has to have a hiring and promotion system based on merit. I’ve seen the damaging effects on an organization as a whole when someone gets a promotion due to nepotism, being friends with the right person, sleeping with the right person or being in the right racial category. People tend not to do their best when they know that isn’t the metric used when passing out promotions.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  20. @Chrisnonymous
    Democrats "do", not "due".

    As I mentioned on a different post recently, the most obvious, topical, and emotionally salient anti-white bias is from people who want elderly whites to die to vaccinate coloreds first. People are already primed to think about the Nursing Home Holocaust of 2020. No vaccines? To the gas chambers!

    Replies: @Curmudgeon, @Supply and Demand

    anti-white bias is from people who want elderly whites to die to vaccinate coloreds first.

    This old Whitey will never be vaccinated, and neither will you if you know what is good for you. From my perspective, they can double and triple dose every Black before any White.

  21. @RoatanBill
    @unit472

    Under the law, all men are created equal, but some are more equal than others. Is that your contention?

    No law should single out any particular human trait. All laws should apply equally to all people. If a certain segment of the society is too ill equipped for certain occupations and educational opportunities, then they should gravitate towards those jobs and schools appropriate to their abilities. What is so wrong with becoming an electrician, plumber, bus driver, etc? Does everyone need a degree to function positively in the society?

    Why import people for farm labor when there are millions of welfare recipients that could easily replace them? Are the mentally challenged for white collar jobs and university too good for such labor? By pandering to that segment of the society that simply isn't equipped to succeed in certain areas you create a permanent underclass of takers that has the time on their hands to turn their resentment into crime. That's where the US is today - people are paid to live a life style that leads to crime and resentment.

    Replies: @Curmudgeon

    Good comment.

    Why import people for farm labor when there are millions of welfare recipients that could easily replace them?

    Because our corporatist society is big on bread and circuses. That means cheap food and distractions. If imported farm labor weren’t available, wages would go up, not down, and food prices would go up. It may also mean that smaller farmers actually get paid what they deserve for their product. A lot more people at the lower end would have less to eat, which may make them “restless”. Restless people have a bad habit of rocking the boat.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @Curmudgeon

    The first thing to do is to take all the prisoners and have them work as seasonal farm labor. Those people should be picking vegetables instead of pumping iron. Eight to twelve hours in the field would teach them what work feels like and make them tired enough to not be a problem after their shift.

    The farmers are largely underpaid for their product. The major purchasers and distributors (corporations) have them by the short hairs. The farmers need to organize to create a unified voice and price for their products. The consumer doesn't necessarily have to pay more. The corporations simply have to live with a lower profit because they can't increase costs without reducing demand. The sweet spot is where everyone makes a reasonable profit for labor and capital expended.

    Replies: @Curmudgeon

  22. “Allowing that 13% to drag the rest down to the level of Haiti or the Congo isn’t in the 87%’s interest, but that’s what they’ll do if they stay here.”

    The drag-down is well underway. The U.S. is 27th internationally in medical-staff competence, 25th in PISA education, 13th in infrastructure, and so on. “Get it basically okay” is the new proficient/conscientious/fastidious. This new standard has not merely been implemented formally; it is also informally contagious. The competent individual (or occupation or institution), finding himself surrounded by incompetence, will very often surrender. The source of the “good enough” standard is not just the 13%. It is also the arrival of migrants. (When I say “migrants” I refer to those who derive from walking-distance immigration.)

    This unraveling is irreversible. How far will the descent go? One can only hope not to the point of creating a nuclear ash-pile. It’s one thing if your eyeglasses prescription is not perfect; sorry; it’s quite another if management of nukes is not perfect.

  23. @Curmudgeon
    @RoatanBill

    Good comment.


    Why import people for farm labor when there are millions of welfare recipients that could easily replace them?
     
    Because our corporatist society is big on bread and circuses. That means cheap food and distractions. If imported farm labor weren't available, wages would go up, not down, and food prices would go up. It may also mean that smaller farmers actually get paid what they deserve for their product. A lot more people at the lower end would have less to eat, which may make them "restless". Restless people have a bad habit of rocking the boat.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

    The first thing to do is to take all the prisoners and have them work as seasonal farm labor. Those people should be picking vegetables instead of pumping iron. Eight to twelve hours in the field would teach them what work feels like and make them tired enough to not be a problem after their shift.

    The farmers are largely underpaid for their product. The major purchasers and distributors (corporations) have them by the short hairs. The farmers need to organize to create a unified voice and price for their products. The consumer doesn’t necessarily have to pay more. The corporations simply have to live with a lower profit because they can’t increase costs without reducing demand. The sweet spot is where everyone makes a reasonable profit for labor and capital expended.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    @RoatanBill

    Agree for the most part, but it seems to me that the prisons buy food instead of growing it. The first step might be creating prison farms for them to work. If they were seasonal workers on regular farms without pay, that may create some employment and constitutional issues with other farmers not in on the deal.
    I gather your sweet spot means a return to industrial capitalism and dumping finance (disaster) capitalism.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

  24. There used to exist a tacit mutual understanding that the affirmative-action hire would settle for job duties that were on the perfunctory end of the spectrum. Good salary + promotions + having to accept that I am not among the best at this. Not perfect, but not so bad a deal. This has broken-down. Second-tier talent now often demands to perform first-tier responsibilities.

  25. @Mr. Rational
    How fascinating that there is a leftist bridge too far even for California.

    Replies: @Curle

    Maybe Leftism is the wrong word for the craziness we are witnessing? I don’t have a better one, BTW.

  26. @nebulafox
    Let the Democrats get even more obsessed with race. Seriously. Let them. Don't let campus freaks and media talking heads fool you. Most Americans do not have comprehensive theories of race, one way or another, and do not want to have politics dominated by the topic. Let the tone of the party become more schoolmarmish and moralistic. They'll alienate more and more people. The Democrats are already the party of affluent liberals, more than anything else. Make them own that, combine it with a GOP willing to abandon zombie Reaganism, and you have your road back to the White House.

    One of the biggest problems the American Right traditionally has had was knowing when to sit back, crack open a cold one, and let the enemy put a big, fat noose around his neck. Don't become more *like* the Democrats, don't ape their talking points, and don't play their game. Become a counterpoint.

    Replies: @Curle, @Talha

    “One of the biggest problems the American Right traditionally has had was knowing when to sit back, crack open a cold one, and let the enemy put a big, fat noose around his neck.”

    Paul Ryan’s favorite saying.

  27. @unit472
    @Arclight

    I agree and to cement the rights support among the working class we must aggressively support trade unions. Modern corporate America is all about destroying workers wages and rights through immigration and off shoring production.

    Imagine if America's truckers had a strong union to represent them. We know they lean right but are not organized. Give them a corruption free Teamsters Union to belong to and it would be the most powerful organization in the US. BLM and Antifa want to riot , the truckers could say fine but we don't deliver food or fuel to any city that cannot maintain order on its streets.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    I agree and to cement the rights support among the working class we must aggressively support trade unions.

    That would be an extremely good idea.

  28. @unit472
    Whether people disapprove of racial preferences or not the fact is college admission officers and corporate HR managers are going to use them. If they don't negroes are going to disappear from the student bodies of elite universities and management positions in the economy and we all know that negroes won't accept what their rightful place in the economic and social hierarchy allows them.

    Absent complete segregation some form of affirmative action is going to have to exist because consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one's interest.

    Replies: @RoatanBill, @dfordoom

    Absent complete segregation some form of affirmative action is going to have to exist because consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one’s interest.

    I agree.

    Affirmative action is the price that has to be paid if you don’t want social chaos. If you want to maintain a reasonably stable functional society there simply isn’t a choice. It’s worth paying a price for some degree of social peace. If you think things are bad now then they would be much much worse without affirmative action.

    One day the knuckle-draggers on the far right will have to accept that reality.

    And forget lunatic ideas like deporting 13% of the population. Even suggesting such insane ideas is the sort of thing that will discredit the Right even further.

    But the far right lives in a world of fantasy, hopelessly divorced from the real world.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    @dfordoom


    Affirmative action is the price that has to be paid if you don’t want social chaos.
     
    The USA had a lot less social chaos before "civil rights" and AA.  The chaos is the PRODUCT of the push for "equality", because it can never be achieved.

    And forget lunatic ideas like deporting 13% of the population.
     
    Lots of Africans become habitual criminals by their teens.  Exile would be an appropriate remedy for them.
  29. @Realist
    All college admission and job hiring should be done on merit only.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    All college admission and job hiring should be done on merit only.

    First you have to define merit.

    I’m sure a lot of people around these parts think that IQ is the measure of merit. It isn’t, or at least it’s not the only measure of merit.

    To give an example, I’d prefer to have honest cops rather than smart cops. I’d also prefer to have honest bureaucrats rather than smart bureaucrats.

    There are many jobs for which IQ or academic attainments are not the best measures of merit. Nursing for example. You can have a high IQ and be a lousy nurse because you just don’t have the right personality type for the job. Another person might have a slightly lower IQ or slightly lower SAT scores or whatever but be an outstanding nurse.

    • Replies: @Realist
    @dfordoom


    First you have to define merit.
     
    Since the idea of higher education is to advance knowledge, those with the desire and intelligence to do advanced level studies constitute merit. Job candidates with the desire and ability to do the work in question constitute merit.

    Nursing for example. You can have a high IQ and be a lousy nurse because you just don’t have the right personality type for the job.
     
    If I were in the hospital I would want a nurse with morals and intelligence...it would be nice if the nurse had a nice personality...but it is not essential.

    In my life, I have work with people that were hard to get along with, some were very good at their work. To me, that was all that mattered...I didn't have to be friends with them...just gain from their knowledge. Those that were stupid, but nice were useless as workers.

    You knew damn well that my comment about merit meant, that merit has nothing to do with race or sex.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  30. @Talha
    Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.

    https://i.redd.it/25100f2o97e21.png

    Peace.

    Replies: @Wyatt, @Rosie, @Rosie

    Islam is right about women.

    • LOL: Talha
  31. @nebulafox
    Let the Democrats get even more obsessed with race. Seriously. Let them. Don't let campus freaks and media talking heads fool you. Most Americans do not have comprehensive theories of race, one way or another, and do not want to have politics dominated by the topic. Let the tone of the party become more schoolmarmish and moralistic. They'll alienate more and more people. The Democrats are already the party of affluent liberals, more than anything else. Make them own that, combine it with a GOP willing to abandon zombie Reaganism, and you have your road back to the White House.

    One of the biggest problems the American Right traditionally has had was knowing when to sit back, crack open a cold one, and let the enemy put a big, fat noose around his neck. Don't become more *like* the Democrats, don't ape their talking points, and don't play their game. Become a counterpoint.

    Replies: @Curle, @Talha

    Very good points here.

    Peace.

  32. @Chrisnonymous
    Democrats "do", not "due".

    As I mentioned on a different post recently, the most obvious, topical, and emotionally salient anti-white bias is from people who want elderly whites to die to vaccinate coloreds first. People are already primed to think about the Nursing Home Holocaust of 2020. No vaccines? To the gas chambers!

    Replies: @Curmudgeon, @Supply and Demand

    I would prefer them to die in state-run de-radicalization camps — but only the 60+ who voted Trump. Using them as vaccine guinea pigs is pointless, Gates is trojan horsing this as a fertility wrecker.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @Supply and Demand


    only the 60+ who voted Trump
     
    There were a lot more than 60+ who voted for Trump.

    (P.S. I make joke with you because your comments are so stupid that you must be trolling.)
  33. @dfordoom
    @Realist


    All college admission and job hiring should be done on merit only.
     
    First you have to define merit.

    I'm sure a lot of people around these parts think that IQ is the measure of merit. It isn't, or at least it's not the only measure of merit.

    To give an example, I'd prefer to have honest cops rather than smart cops. I'd also prefer to have honest bureaucrats rather than smart bureaucrats.

    There are many jobs for which IQ or academic attainments are not the best measures of merit. Nursing for example. You can have a high IQ and be a lousy nurse because you just don't have the right personality type for the job. Another person might have a slightly lower IQ or slightly lower SAT scores or whatever but be an outstanding nurse.

    Replies: @Realist

    First you have to define merit.

    Since the idea of higher education is to advance knowledge, those with the desire and intelligence to do advanced level studies constitute merit. Job candidates with the desire and ability to do the work in question constitute merit.

    Nursing for example. You can have a high IQ and be a lousy nurse because you just don’t have the right personality type for the job.

    If I were in the hospital I would want a nurse with morals and intelligence…it would be nice if the nurse had a nice personality…but it is not essential.

    In my life, I have work with people that were hard to get along with, some were very good at their work. To me, that was all that mattered…I didn’t have to be friends with them…just gain from their knowledge. Those that were stupid, but nice were useless as workers.

    You knew damn well that my comment about merit meant, that merit has nothing to do with race or sex.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Realist


    You knew damn well that my comment about merit meant, that merit has nothing to do with race or sex.
     
    Of course.

    I was addressing the broader question of meritocracy, which I think is a dubious concept.

    There are cases in which merit is not necessarily the best way to choose someone for the job. If I decided to set up a Christian counselling service I would not select counsellors solely on merit. I'd want the counsellors to be actual Christians. I'd choose a less qualified Christian in preference to a better qualified atheist.

    If I decided to set up a mentoring scheme for young girls then when choosing the mentors I'd choose a less qualified woman in preference to a better qualified man. If it was a mentoring scheme for young boys then when choosing the mentors I'd choose a less qualified man in preference to a better qualified woman. If it was a mentoring scheme for young blacks then when choosing the mentors I'd choose a less qualified black in preference to a better qualified white.

    People should be chosen for jobs on the basis of their suitability for the job which can in some cases mean that other factors apart from merit need to be considered.

    Replies: @Realist

  34. @JohnPlywood
    Whites aren't hurt by affirmative action anymore. They were back in the 1980s when there was a surplus of overqualified whites, and when the majority of nonwhites were clinically retarded blacks, but those days are over. Today, whites are actually less qualified than they were back then, and ever since then there has been a major influx of overqualifed Asians from Asia, who are today the ones who carry the yoke of affirmative action.

    Furthermore, whites aren't even competing for the same iobs as minorities, and remain by far the most regionally racially isolated group of people in the country.

    Thus, low support for affirmative action among whites is a cultural relic of the 1980s and 1990, reflecting a general stupidity and mental fog that whites are famous for. On the other hand, Asian's relatively high support for affirmative action is truly perplexing. It may be that Asians, who actually have slightly lower verbal IQs than whites, are so socially retarded and autistic that they cannot understand how affirmative action is going to hold them back. They bought in to the Woke propaganda, much like white trashionalists bought in to David Duke's anti-affirmative action propaganda back in the 1980s.

    Replies: @Catdog

    Asians DO benefit from some forms of affirmative action. SBA grants and federal contract preference for example.

  35. @dfordoom
    @unit472


    Absent complete segregation some form of affirmative action is going to have to exist because consigning 13% of the US population to the level of Haiti or the Congo is in no one’s interest.
     
    I agree.

    Affirmative action is the price that has to be paid if you don't want social chaos. If you want to maintain a reasonably stable functional society there simply isn't a choice. It's worth paying a price for some degree of social peace. If you think things are bad now then they would be much much worse without affirmative action.

    One day the knuckle-draggers on the far right will have to accept that reality.

    And forget lunatic ideas like deporting 13% of the population. Even suggesting such insane ideas is the sort of thing that will discredit the Right even further.

    But the far right lives in a world of fantasy, hopelessly divorced from the real world.

    Replies: @Mr. Rational

    Affirmative action is the price that has to be paid if you don’t want social chaos.

    The USA had a lot less social chaos before “civil rights” and AA.  The chaos is the PRODUCT of the push for “equality”, because it can never be achieved.

    And forget lunatic ideas like deporting 13% of the population.

    Lots of Africans become habitual criminals by their teens.  Exile would be an appropriate remedy for them.

  36. @RoatanBill
    @Curmudgeon

    The first thing to do is to take all the prisoners and have them work as seasonal farm labor. Those people should be picking vegetables instead of pumping iron. Eight to twelve hours in the field would teach them what work feels like and make them tired enough to not be a problem after their shift.

    The farmers are largely underpaid for their product. The major purchasers and distributors (corporations) have them by the short hairs. The farmers need to organize to create a unified voice and price for their products. The consumer doesn't necessarily have to pay more. The corporations simply have to live with a lower profit because they can't increase costs without reducing demand. The sweet spot is where everyone makes a reasonable profit for labor and capital expended.

    Replies: @Curmudgeon

    Agree for the most part, but it seems to me that the prisons buy food instead of growing it. The first step might be creating prison farms for them to work. If they were seasonal workers on regular farms without pay, that may create some employment and constitutional issues with other farmers not in on the deal.
    I gather your sweet spot means a return to industrial capitalism and dumping finance (disaster) capitalism.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @Curmudgeon

    Prisoners should get minimum wage, but they should be made to work hard.

    Candidly, I'm against prisons as totally unnecessary institutions. Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense. Non violent prisoners should be put in work camps at minimum wage to make restitution for their thievery, etc to their victims. Prisons serve no useful purpose except to glorify the state and provide the ruling political class with a phony symbol of how they are tough on crime. Bullshit.

    Just as all farm labor competes in the marketplace, let prisoners have an advocate that rents them out as labor on farms, in factories, anywhere that they could know what work is and earn money to repay their debts to their victims, not some nebulous entity commonly referred to as society.

    All I know is the current system is a farce.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom

  37. @Curmudgeon
    @RoatanBill

    Agree for the most part, but it seems to me that the prisons buy food instead of growing it. The first step might be creating prison farms for them to work. If they were seasonal workers on regular farms without pay, that may create some employment and constitutional issues with other farmers not in on the deal.
    I gather your sweet spot means a return to industrial capitalism and dumping finance (disaster) capitalism.

    Replies: @RoatanBill

    Prisoners should get minimum wage, but they should be made to work hard.

    Candidly, I’m against prisons as totally unnecessary institutions. Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense. Non violent prisoners should be put in work camps at minimum wage to make restitution for their thievery, etc to their victims. Prisons serve no useful purpose except to glorify the state and provide the ruling political class with a phony symbol of how they are tough on crime. Bullshit.

    Just as all farm labor competes in the marketplace, let prisoners have an advocate that rents them out as labor on farms, in factories, anywhere that they could know what work is and earn money to repay their debts to their victims, not some nebulous entity commonly referred to as society.

    All I know is the current system is a farce.

    • Troll: Rosie
    • Replies: @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.
     
    Hmmm. Would that include drunken wifebeaters? Personally, I think all concerned would be better off if we took a crack at rehabilitation, but we can't take the risk of the gubmint getting credit for anything, so let's just kill people instead.

    Of course, I can't think of anything more likely to create horrific government abuse and corruption than prison labor. Giving the government ny sort of economic incentive to prosecute and incarcerated people can't possibly lead to anything good.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @RoatanBill

    , @dfordoom
    @RoatanBill


    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.
     
    The death penalty is a seriously bad idea unless you are absolutely certain you can trust the government and unless you are absolutely certain that the courts and the police are competent and honest.

    Do you really trust the government and the courts enough to give them the power of life or death over citizens?

    Replies: @RoatanBill

  38. @Realist
    @dfordoom


    First you have to define merit.
     
    Since the idea of higher education is to advance knowledge, those with the desire and intelligence to do advanced level studies constitute merit. Job candidates with the desire and ability to do the work in question constitute merit.

    Nursing for example. You can have a high IQ and be a lousy nurse because you just don’t have the right personality type for the job.
     
    If I were in the hospital I would want a nurse with morals and intelligence...it would be nice if the nurse had a nice personality...but it is not essential.

    In my life, I have work with people that were hard to get along with, some were very good at their work. To me, that was all that mattered...I didn't have to be friends with them...just gain from their knowledge. Those that were stupid, but nice were useless as workers.

    You knew damn well that my comment about merit meant, that merit has nothing to do with race or sex.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    You knew damn well that my comment about merit meant, that merit has nothing to do with race or sex.

    Of course.

    I was addressing the broader question of meritocracy, which I think is a dubious concept.

    There are cases in which merit is not necessarily the best way to choose someone for the job. If I decided to set up a Christian counselling service I would not select counsellors solely on merit. I’d want the counsellors to be actual Christians. I’d choose a less qualified Christian in preference to a better qualified atheist.

    If I decided to set up a mentoring scheme for young girls then when choosing the mentors I’d choose a less qualified woman in preference to a better qualified man. If it was a mentoring scheme for young boys then when choosing the mentors I’d choose a less qualified man in preference to a better qualified woman. If it was a mentoring scheme for young blacks then when choosing the mentors I’d choose a less qualified black in preference to a better qualified white.

    People should be chosen for jobs on the basis of their suitability for the job which can in some cases mean that other factors apart from merit need to be considered.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Realist
    @dfordoom


    There are cases in which merit is not necessarily the best way to choose someone for the job. If I decided to set up a Christian counselling service I would not select counsellors solely on merit. I’d want the counsellors to be actual Christians. I’d choose a less qualified Christian in preference to a better qualified atheist.
     
    Your spurious arguments are silly. Of course, deciding the merit of a particular potential employee would include his or her knowledge of the job subject and ability to do the job.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

  39. @dfordoom
    @Realist


    You knew damn well that my comment about merit meant, that merit has nothing to do with race or sex.
     
    Of course.

    I was addressing the broader question of meritocracy, which I think is a dubious concept.

    There are cases in which merit is not necessarily the best way to choose someone for the job. If I decided to set up a Christian counselling service I would not select counsellors solely on merit. I'd want the counsellors to be actual Christians. I'd choose a less qualified Christian in preference to a better qualified atheist.

    If I decided to set up a mentoring scheme for young girls then when choosing the mentors I'd choose a less qualified woman in preference to a better qualified man. If it was a mentoring scheme for young boys then when choosing the mentors I'd choose a less qualified man in preference to a better qualified woman. If it was a mentoring scheme for young blacks then when choosing the mentors I'd choose a less qualified black in preference to a better qualified white.

    People should be chosen for jobs on the basis of their suitability for the job which can in some cases mean that other factors apart from merit need to be considered.

    Replies: @Realist

    There are cases in which merit is not necessarily the best way to choose someone for the job. If I decided to set up a Christian counselling service I would not select counsellors solely on merit. I’d want the counsellors to be actual Christians. I’d choose a less qualified Christian in preference to a better qualified atheist.

    Your spurious arguments are silly. Of course, deciding the merit of a particular potential employee would include his or her knowledge of the job subject and ability to do the job.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @Realist


    People should be chosen for jobs on the basis of their suitability for the job which can in some cases mean that other factors apart from merit need to be considered.
     
    What does "merit" mean other than "suitability for the job"?

    Replies: @Realist

  40. @Realist
    @dfordoom


    There are cases in which merit is not necessarily the best way to choose someone for the job. If I decided to set up a Christian counselling service I would not select counsellors solely on merit. I’d want the counsellors to be actual Christians. I’d choose a less qualified Christian in preference to a better qualified atheist.
     
    Your spurious arguments are silly. Of course, deciding the merit of a particular potential employee would include his or her knowledge of the job subject and ability to do the job.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    People should be chosen for jobs on the basis of their suitability for the job which can in some cases mean that other factors apart from merit need to be considered.

    What does “merit” mean other than “suitability for the job”?

    • Replies: @Realist
    @Intelligent Dasein


    What does “merit” mean other than “suitability for the job”?
     
    Exactly...tell that to dfordoom.
  41. @Intelligent Dasein
    @Realist


    People should be chosen for jobs on the basis of their suitability for the job which can in some cases mean that other factors apart from merit need to be considered.
     
    What does "merit" mean other than "suitability for the job"?

    Replies: @Realist

    What does “merit” mean other than “suitability for the job”?

    Exactly…tell that to dfordoom.

  42. @Supply and Demand
    @Chrisnonymous

    I would prefer them to die in state-run de-radicalization camps — but only the 60+ who voted Trump. Using them as vaccine guinea pigs is pointless, Gates is trojan horsing this as a fertility wrecker.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    only the 60+ who voted Trump

    There were a lot more than 60+ who voted for Trump.

    (P.S. I make joke with you because your comments are so stupid that you must be trolling.)

  43. @RoatanBill
    @Curmudgeon

    Prisoners should get minimum wage, but they should be made to work hard.

    Candidly, I'm against prisons as totally unnecessary institutions. Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense. Non violent prisoners should be put in work camps at minimum wage to make restitution for their thievery, etc to their victims. Prisons serve no useful purpose except to glorify the state and provide the ruling political class with a phony symbol of how they are tough on crime. Bullshit.

    Just as all farm labor competes in the marketplace, let prisoners have an advocate that rents them out as labor on farms, in factories, anywhere that they could know what work is and earn money to repay their debts to their victims, not some nebulous entity commonly referred to as society.

    All I know is the current system is a farce.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom

    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.

    Hmmm. Would that include drunken wifebeaters? Personally, I think all concerned would be better off if we took a crack at rehabilitation, but we can’t take the risk of the gubmint getting credit for anything, so let’s just kill people instead.

    Of course, I can’t think of anything more likely to create horrific government abuse and corruption than prison labor. Giving the government ny sort of economic incentive to prosecute and incarcerated people can’t possibly lead to anything good.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    Personally, I think all concerned would be better off if we took a crack at rehabilitation, but we can’t take the risk of the gubmint getting credit for anything, so let’s just kill people instead.
     
    I agree with Rosie on this one.

    Of course, I can’t think of anything more likely to create horrific government abuse and corruption than prison labor. Giving the government ny sort of economic incentive to prosecute and incarcerated people can’t possibly lead to anything good.
     
    I agree very strongly.
    , @RoatanBill
    @Rosie

    As for wife beating, the wife should shoot the husband and then get a medal from the mayor for getting rid of a POS. Rehabilitation is simply avoiding the problem logically. That's been tried and found lacking.

    New rule - you purposely hurt someone, purposely damage their property, you die for it. One strike and you're out. In a short while, crime goes to near zero because all the trash in the society has been buried.

    Watch any of the docudramas on YouTube that describe specific criminal incidents and you'll find that the vast majority of murderers, rapists, kidnappers, etc were already well known to the police from numerous prior violent incidents. The current system encourages repeat offense because the perp is left breathing from the first incident.

  44. @RoatanBill
    @Curmudgeon

    Prisoners should get minimum wage, but they should be made to work hard.

    Candidly, I'm against prisons as totally unnecessary institutions. Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense. Non violent prisoners should be put in work camps at minimum wage to make restitution for their thievery, etc to their victims. Prisons serve no useful purpose except to glorify the state and provide the ruling political class with a phony symbol of how they are tough on crime. Bullshit.

    Just as all farm labor competes in the marketplace, let prisoners have an advocate that rents them out as labor on farms, in factories, anywhere that they could know what work is and earn money to repay their debts to their victims, not some nebulous entity commonly referred to as society.

    All I know is the current system is a farce.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom

    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.

    The death penalty is a seriously bad idea unless you are absolutely certain you can trust the government and unless you are absolutely certain that the courts and the police are competent and honest.

    Do you really trust the government and the courts enough to give them the power of life or death over citizens?

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    @dfordoom

    The gov't already has life and death power over the population. Where have you been? Is the gov't not now incarcerating the population? Is the gov't not now talking people into getting a jab that hasn't been tested according to prior standards?

    There are clear cut cases where people get caught in the act or where physical evidence leaves no doubt about what happened. In the current system the criminal is put in prison and possibly released in a decade or two to repeat offensive behavior. People on death row linger there for decades on the public's dime. I believe the record is over 40 years and the criminal eventually died in prison. This is insanity.

    I would prefer that the entire population be armed and ready to protect themselves instead of useless cops cruising around town handing out traffic tickets. The victim has personal knowledge and should be in a position to take out the violent criminal on the spot. That's the way to get rid of the trash in the society, not the ridiculous justice system that encourages repeat crime.

    Most people have been conditioned to be lenient to the criminal element with faulty logic. I'm asking people to reassess what's been hammered into their heads by gov't as to how criminals should be treated because the current system doesn't solve the problem, just puts it off with horrific consequences when known violent people are put back on the street to commit more crime.

  45. @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.
     
    Hmmm. Would that include drunken wifebeaters? Personally, I think all concerned would be better off if we took a crack at rehabilitation, but we can't take the risk of the gubmint getting credit for anything, so let's just kill people instead.

    Of course, I can't think of anything more likely to create horrific government abuse and corruption than prison labor. Giving the government ny sort of economic incentive to prosecute and incarcerated people can't possibly lead to anything good.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @RoatanBill

    Personally, I think all concerned would be better off if we took a crack at rehabilitation, but we can’t take the risk of the gubmint getting credit for anything, so let’s just kill people instead.

    I agree with Rosie on this one.

    Of course, I can’t think of anything more likely to create horrific government abuse and corruption than prison labor. Giving the government ny sort of economic incentive to prosecute and incarcerated people can’t possibly lead to anything good.

    I agree very strongly.

  46. @Rosie
    @RoatanBill


    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.
     
    Hmmm. Would that include drunken wifebeaters? Personally, I think all concerned would be better off if we took a crack at rehabilitation, but we can't take the risk of the gubmint getting credit for anything, so let's just kill people instead.

    Of course, I can't think of anything more likely to create horrific government abuse and corruption than prison labor. Giving the government ny sort of economic incentive to prosecute and incarcerated people can't possibly lead to anything good.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @RoatanBill

    As for wife beating, the wife should shoot the husband and then get a medal from the mayor for getting rid of a POS. Rehabilitation is simply avoiding the problem logically. That’s been tried and found lacking.

    New rule – you purposely hurt someone, purposely damage their property, you die for it. One strike and you’re out. In a short while, crime goes to near zero because all the trash in the society has been buried.

    Watch any of the docudramas on YouTube that describe specific criminal incidents and you’ll find that the vast majority of murderers, rapists, kidnappers, etc were already well known to the police from numerous prior violent incidents. The current system encourages repeat offense because the perp is left breathing from the first incident.

  47. @dfordoom
    @RoatanBill


    Violent prisoners should be killed on their first offense.
     
    The death penalty is a seriously bad idea unless you are absolutely certain you can trust the government and unless you are absolutely certain that the courts and the police are competent and honest.

    Do you really trust the government and the courts enough to give them the power of life or death over citizens?

    Replies: @RoatanBill

    The gov’t already has life and death power over the population. Where have you been? Is the gov’t not now incarcerating the population? Is the gov’t not now talking people into getting a jab that hasn’t been tested according to prior standards?

    There are clear cut cases where people get caught in the act or where physical evidence leaves no doubt about what happened. In the current system the criminal is put in prison and possibly released in a decade or two to repeat offensive behavior. People on death row linger there for decades on the public’s dime. I believe the record is over 40 years and the criminal eventually died in prison. This is insanity.

    I would prefer that the entire population be armed and ready to protect themselves instead of useless cops cruising around town handing out traffic tickets. The victim has personal knowledge and should be in a position to take out the violent criminal on the spot. That’s the way to get rid of the trash in the society, not the ridiculous justice system that encourages repeat crime.

    Most people have been conditioned to be lenient to the criminal element with faulty logic. I’m asking people to reassess what’s been hammered into their heads by gov’t as to how criminals should be treated because the current system doesn’t solve the problem, just puts it off with horrific consequences when known violent people are put back on the street to commit more crime.

  48. you purposely hurt someone, purposely damage their property, you die for it.

    You have to learn to crawl before you can walk. If you cannot first get society to sign onto some variation of lex talionis (if you cannot convince them that an offender who breaks a finger needs to get his finger broken, good luck getting him executed), anything beyond that is wishful thinking.

    Peace.

  49. @Talha
    Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.

    https://i.redd.it/25100f2o97e21.png

    Peace.

    Replies: @Wyatt, @Rosie, @Rosie

    Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.

    I dunno, Talha. I sometimes wonder if some sort of affirmative action for on ramping mothers (or fathers, of course) might be just the thing that is needed. Veterans, for example, get preferential treatment in federal government hiring. That is a no-brainer, of course, and I don’t think returning mothers have anywhere near as strong a claim to preference as combat Veterans, but the principle is the same.

    One criticism European feminists have of the American women’s movement is that we have been too shy about asking for special favors in consideration of our special needs as mothers because of the negative associations with the “separate but equal” idea.

    I don’t have a strong position either way, but I do think that the point is at least arguable, and I think that is what is behind the greater support for affirmative action for women, even among men, God bless them.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    Veterans, for example, get preferential treatment in federal government hiring. That is a no-brainer, of course
     
    I'm assuming that people here who think all hiring should be strictly on the basis of merit are totally opposed to veterans getting preferential treatment in federal government hiring? Because it is a form of affirmative action isn't it?
  50. @Talha
    Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.

    https://i.redd.it/25100f2o97e21.png

    Peace.

    Replies: @Wyatt, @Rosie, @Rosie

    BTW, Talha, I never answered your question about purses. Since they don’t cause blisters, style is much more important with purses than shoes. Beyond that, I can’t explain it. I’ve never been into the purse thing. I do understand it, though. If you gave me a whole closet to store vintage pyrex and other assorted tableware, I’d have it filled and color-coded just like this lady:

    And don’t laugh, this stuff can be worth lots of money if you keep it in good condition, though nowhere near as good an investment as designer bags!

    https://www.wideopeneats.com/vintage-pyrex-patterns/

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/lelalondon/2020/07/01/designer-handbags-are-now-a-better-investment-than-art/?sh=6c8e7c4b64c5

    • Thanks: Talha
  51. @Rosie
    @Talha


    Supports preferential hiring of women.

    TFR of society tanks.
     

    I dunno, Talha. I sometimes wonder if some sort of affirmative action for on ramping mothers (or fathers, of course) might be just the thing that is needed. Veterans, for example, get preferential treatment in federal government hiring. That is a no-brainer, of course, and I don't think returning mothers have anywhere near as strong a claim to preference as combat Veterans, but the principle is the same.

    One criticism European feminists have of the American women's movement is that we have been too shy about asking for special favors in consideration of our special needs as mothers because of the negative associations with the "separate but equal" idea.

    I don't have a strong position either way, but I do think that the point is at least arguable, and I think that is what is behind the greater support for affirmative action for women, even among men, God bless them.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Veterans, for example, get preferential treatment in federal government hiring. That is a no-brainer, of course

    I’m assuming that people here who think all hiring should be strictly on the basis of merit are totally opposed to veterans getting preferential treatment in federal government hiring? Because it is a form of affirmative action isn’t it?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS