Auto Added by WPeMatico

Hitler in Hell

I get over-Hitlered. I have read too much about the man and I resist, in vain, yet another tome on the subject of this revolutionary modernist mass annihilator. I know that Stalin makes Hitler look like a piker when it comes to mass murder, but Stalin is fundamentally a communist, and Communism is stupid, dumb, mechanical, and eliminatory.  In Communism we find the modern university, obsessed with false explanations for inequality, but with death quotas and actual mass murder.

“Fascism”, as Fran Leibowitz said, “is too exciting, communism, too boring”. So it was with some trepidation that I ordered Martin Van Creveld’s pseudo-autobiography “Hitler in Hell”. Hitler writes from a sort of air-conditioned featureless, shadowless world where the demons take his tray and keep him fed, but he faces an eternity of nothingness as a punishment for his sins and crimes.

Martin van Creveld is a military historian, an Israeli Jew of Dutch origin. He has written plenty of serious important books on warfare, logistics, and strategy.

His Hitler in Hell is a hoot. It is a way of telling Hitler’s story in an amusing way while Creveld (alias Hitler) gets to take a few shots at Joachim Fest, David Irving, Allan Bullock, John Toland and Ian Kershaw, Hitler’s historians, and, in his fictional voice,  the German generals whom Hitler thinks betrayed him.

It presents Hitler in straightforward terms as acting rationally to defend and avenge Germany in the wake of World War 1, as long as you can accept the absolutely demented notion that the Jews are the world’s parasites. Van Creveld presents Hitler as sane, save only that he was obsessed with the Jews, obsessed, and ready to murder them the way you take insect spray to a hornet’s nest.

Just as Stalin was a pure communist, and sought to eliminate all capitalist-market relations in the Soviet Union, even at the price of destroying his farmers and peasantry, so Hitler was a pure anti-Semite, and sought to eliminate all Jews wherever he could get his hands on them.

All the rest of his behaviour was sincerely anti-democratic, expansionary, war-mongering, cruel, and suited for the obloquy of man, but it was rational if you accept the premises of German cultural and racial supremacy, and hatred of everything Jewish.

One other book that comes close to capturing Hitler’s mindset is the most outrageous book I have ever read, Norman Spinrad‘s “The Iron Dream”, which purports to be a book authored by one Adolf Hitler, who emigrated to the United States in 1919 and illustrated science fiction books, and who eventually turned his hand to writing science fiction. You know, with titles like “Lords of the Swastika”. I recommend it if you can find it as a book, or go to the Intertubes and find it as a pdf.

There was yet another book about Hitler in which a team of Israeli commandos find him in the jungles of Paraguay. They cannot get him out for some reason so they put him on trial before a jury of one Guarani Indian. It was The Portage to San Cristobal of AH, by George Steiner. In his self defence, Hitler is allowed to speak. The Indian juror does not understand a word of the oration, but understands his meaning perfectly. The Guarani Indian decides that Hitler is a shaman. As such he could not be guilty, since he is a magician. In his defence, Steiner’s Hitler defends master race ideology  as nothing more than what the Jews believe about themselves, and claims to be the real founder of Israel. You can imagine the controversy that Steiner got himself into.

It is curious that, in reading van Creveld’s commentary on writing Hitler in Hell, found at the back end of the book and George Steiner’s comments on writing the Portage to San Cristobal  of AH, they each admit that once they got the idea, the books practically wrote themselves.

Steiner, Van Creveld, and Spinrad – all Jews – are a lot quicker and less ponderous to read than Joachim Fest and Ian Kershaw. Of the three of them, Spinrad captures the anti-semitism of Hitler as no one else ever has. I repeat my warning that Spinrad’s book is outrageous. Frankly I think only a Jew could get to the core of anti-semitism as well.  Van Creveld’s take on Hitler will convey more facts and accurate chronology. If you want to read about the Third Reich for a rapid and insightful overview, van Creveld is greatly recommended.

 

 

The Thirteenth Warrior

 

Image result for the thirteenth warrior

 

 

I saw the Thirteenth Warrior again after a gap of many years. My friend, who had never seen it until yesterday, is now another convert to this outrageously wonderful movie.

Let’s face it, it is a national socialist movie. No, I do not mean National Socialist as in a celebration of hideous Hitlerian totalitarian doctrines. It is the story of Beowulf retold,  where Grendel becomes a collective monster, a  tribe of cannibals who eat humans, and who think they themselves are bears.  The humans, northmen all, are fighting for their lives against an apparently superior force of anti-human evil, the Wendol, the collective of cannibals. It is based on the clever Michael Crichton’s story, Eaters of the Dead.

In writing this little article, I came across the negative review by Roger Ebert. Pay him no attention. Lisa Schwarzbaum called it “the most unexpectedly audacious, exhilarating, and wildly creative adventure thriller I have seen in ages”.[12]

As a friend once said, The Thirteenth Warrior is the same movie as Cross of Iron (1977), or Aliens (1986). A group of warriors who think they are the toughest meanest sons of bitches have to take on an overwhelming force of alien evil, and they discover the limits of their powers.

It is also outrageous fun. Watch it with other males.

Lo do I see my father before me

Lo do I see my mother, my sisters, my brothers before me

Lo do I see them back to the Beginning

Lo do I see them in the Halls of Valhalla

Where the brave may live forever!

It will get you pumped. Pajama boys will need to retreat to a safe space to recover.

As the bard says to the Arab diplomat character about the Wendol, after he has killed a few of them, “Don’t worry little brother, there are more!”. That is to say, aliens left to kill. The struggle is eternal.

 

 

 

 

 

Diversity means uniformity; inclusion means exclusion

You are not alone if you have begun to cotton on to the idea that “diversity” does not include you, dear reader. You are probably male, probably over forty, probably white, and you do not fit into the desired categories of “diverse” people that the Left favours. Tucker Carlson  started into the diversity mantra the other night by asking some long overdue questions.

 

 

Diversity is hogwash. I come from a formerly diverse society. It is called Quebec, and whatever you might feel about the French Canadians, they are very sound on the diversity question. They will have none of it, as long as diversity presents an English-speaking face. They have resisted “diversification” for centuries, which they call assimilation, and will continue to do so until they disappear demographically, which is a long way off. Having been raised in a society where I was the rejected outsider, I have come to appreciate how normal it is for a society to reject multiculturalism, and insist on the society’s right to perpetuate itself, even at great cost.

Perhaps by reason of personal history I am skeptical of diversity, or at least conscious of where it begins and ends. A common language is good, though not essential. But a common set of civic values is essential to the maintenance of liberty, order, cohesion, and yes, actual tolerance for diversity.

If you want to experience “diversity”, go to India. Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Jains Sikhs, Parsis: all vie for space, respect, and resources. Forty,  or is it four hundred, languages create a babble of mutual incomprehension.  Racial, caste, and ethnic differences are as great as anything in all of Europe, even considering how it is after the Muslim refugee invasion.

I want everyone to start questioning “diversity”.

A new bumper sticker is needed.

 

Question diversity

 

This anti-white stuff is coming for you, dude

 

Explicit anti-white racism is now de rigeur in our universities. If you think this is temporary, think again.

First demonstrate your contribution to “diversity”, as defined by the academic elites who seek to abolish themselves because, to no one’s surprize, they are white.The College Fix reports

For Cal Poly, requiring the diversity statement is one part of a larger effort school officials are engaged in to “improve diversity” via dozens of various endeavors outlined in its 30-page action plan. As part of the diversity initiatives plan, the university also has a goal of “increasing, in a Proposition 209-compliant manner, the hiring of diverse faculty utilizing cluster hires every other year.”

It is evident to me and to a growing number of reasonable people that the entire university sector is overinflated and needs drastic reduction of its financial resources. The government must stop subsidizing this racialist evil. And stop enserfing our children to debt for a useless and dangerous miseducation.

Here is a portion of Cal Poly’s action plan. To read it is to see the anti-white future:

 

Office of University Diversity and Inclusion
Diversity Action Initiatives
Items in bold are key initiatives.
Future Actions Initiative Anticipated Implementation Department(s) Description
Cultural Humility Institute
Winter 2019
Vice President for Student Affairs, Office of University Diversity and Inclusion
Cultural humility is a lifelong process of self-reflection, self-critique, and commitment to understanding and respecting different points of view and engaging with others humbly, authentically and from a place of learning (Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998).

Student Diversity Advisory Committee
Fall 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
An advisory committee to the Office of University Diversity & Inclusion made up of student representatives to help guide work related to student concerns and to gain input on initiatives.

Campus-Wide Allyship Trainings

Fall 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion and Cross Cultural Centers
An expansion of the currently offered Allyship workshops on Race & Ethnicity and Gender & Sexuality offered by the Cross Cultural Centers.

Collective Impact Strategic Action Plan Open Forum
Fall 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
The Inclusive Excellence Council will review the Collective Impact Recommendations and create a strategic plan to be shared in a Fall 2018 Open Forum.

Collective Impact Strategy Group Recommendations
June 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
The three Strategy Groups will have short- and long-term recommendations outlined.

Mandatory Implicit Bias Trainings for MPPs and Confidential Employees
Spring 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion and Employee and Organization Development
The “Exposing Hidden Bias” workshop will be mandatory for all MPPs and Confidential Employees.

Collective Impact Listening Sessions
Spring 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
Open sessions reflecting the 3 Collective Impact Strategy Groups: Campus Climate, Curriculum, and Recruit & Retain. The sessions will garner input from participants.

All Faculty and Staff Association Meeting
Spring 2018
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
A gathering of representatives from the 5 established Faculty Staff Associations.
Expand BEACoN mentors to include staff and alumni *
TBD
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
Include opportunities for staff and alumni to provide mentorship for underrepresented students

Campus Climate Survey
2019
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
A survey to assess campus climate will be re-administered.

New Employee Orientation
2017
Employee and Organization Development
An introductory training for new employees at Cal Poly. Onboarding for all new staff positions, including a diversity and inclusion segment.

BEACoN Research Mentor Program
2017
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
The BEACoN Research Mentor Program pairs students with research mentorship under the guidance of faculty. Enhanced the faculty/student mentorship program to add paid research opportunities.

Collective Impact Process for Advancing Diversity & Inclusion at Cal Poly
2017
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
The Collective Impact approach is premised on the belief that no single policy, department, organization or program can tackle or solve the increasingly complex social problems we face as a society. The approach calls for multiple organizations or entities from different sectors to abandon their own agenda in favor of a common agenda, shared measurement and alignment of effort. Unlike collaboration or partnership, Collective Impact initiatives have centralized infrastructure – known as a backbone organization – with dedicated staff whose role is to help participating organizations shift from acting alone to acting in concert.

Vice President for Diversity & Inclusion
2017
President’s Cabinet
The lead position in OUDI was elevated to executive level for greater impact.
Established the Chicana/o Latino/a and Indigenous Alumni Chapter
2017
Alumni Association
Supports and creates community for Latinx alumni.

Faculty Associate Positions
2017
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion
Faculty Associates are hired by OUDI to gain a faculty perspective in diversity and inclusion work.

Implicit Bias Trainings for Staff and Faculty
2017
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion and Employee and Organization Development
A two-part implicit bias workshop series that brings attention to the unconscious biases we all possess and provides some strategies for overcoming thier impact in our work and relationships.

Implicit Bias Trainings for Faculty Search Committees
2016
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion and Academic Personnel
This training introduces participants to implicit bias in decision-making and hiring. It is required for all tenure/tenure-track faculty search committees.

Diversity in the Curriculum Training for Faculty
2016
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion and the Center for Teaching Learning & Technology
A summer week-long workshop designed for faculty to incorporate diversity and inclusion topics into their curricula.

Bias Incident Response Team Established
2016
Office of University Diversity & Inclusion and Dean of Students
The Bias Incident Response Team (BIRT) is co-chaired by the Dean of Students and the VP for Diversity & Inclusion. The team meets to discuss the appropriate course of action on hate/bias incidents on campus. BIRT also works to support and provide resources to those who are targets and/or witness acts of bias in our campus community.

==========

Remember:

Diversity = uniformity

Inclusion = exclusion

Links

Social justice warrior is shamed by former colleagues.

  • from Quillette

White lives don’t matter, or any victims of crime, in Chicago

  • from City Journal

Stefan Molyneux on race and intelligence, on the David Rubin show

  • if it were just racism, it could be fixed
  • when you adjust for IQ, people have the same crime rates and the same capacity for wealth generation. Think about that for a moment.

Steve Bannon, Trumpite and agitator for the American working class, and Lanny Davis, former White House adviser and a Democrat, engage in a real debate

  • a polite, intense and well-mannered contest of ideas!
  • “50% of the families in our country do not have $400 for an emergency” – Steve Bannon
  • “We got here because we have allowed the global elite to run the show”. – SB

Everyone is smarter than Trump.

  • especially the media

Not clear on the concept

From the left hand end of the bell curve comes news that a man (guess what colour he is) sought to extort a domain name through a shooting and home invasion.

During the invasion, his wounded victim shot back and hit him four times. The assailant got 20 years for this and other crimes.

After being clubbed with the pistol and repeatedly targeted with a Taser, Deyo [the victim] gained control of the handgun, despite being shot in the leg. He then shot Hopkins [the assailant] several times in the chest and called police. Hopkins, who survived the incident in June last year, pleaded guilty to one count of “interference and attempted interference with commerce by threats and violence”.

You can’t make this up.

Hopkins is pictured below.

we are living in a liberal Oceania

Fred Reed writes:

“Affirmative action” means hiring people because they can’t do the job well. Near-synonyms are “diversity,” meaning groups that cannot do the job well, and “inclusiveness,” which means seeking people who you know cannot do the job well. These underpin American society, and have ruined education.

More here.

“Mac Donald goes on to tell of school after school accepting diversity with credentials well below those of real students, of schools dropping the GRE requirement because it makes obvious that in STEM fields women and minorities are not performing as desired. (“Minorities” always means “poorly performing minorities.” Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and so on don’t count.)”

Heather MacDonald on “How Identity Politics is Harming the Sciences”

The situation is dire because the lies are so deeply believed, the conformity required is so effectively enforced, and the penalty for thinking differently is exclusion and oblivion.

Hence we are living in a liberal Oceania

  • inclusion is exclusion

  • diversity is uniformity

  • tolerance is intolerance

Science is superior to native traditional knowledge. And no, I am not sorry.

 

 

Science is a procedure of verifiability, or if you prefer, falsifiability. It is not a racial or cultural trait. If you cannot establish a proposition that is capable of being shown to be untrue it is not science, it is belief, it is conjecture, it is myth, it is “traditional knowledge”

On the other hand, science – by the post modern (racialist) definition – is “white” by accident of being derived from Europe. I am not asserting racial superiority here, but I am asserting that neither Hindu, Islamic or Chinese civilizations managed to develop this form of knowing the world, the one that has produced the greatest improvement of the state of most people in the world in the last 400 years.

In the current environment of insanity, it is dangerous to suggest that there might be conflicts between assertions of traditional knowledge and science. It is a ‘racism of intelligence’.

A Quebec civil servant raised a ruckus when he pointed out that a conflict could arise between science and “traditional aboriginal knowledge”. Bad man! Outrage proceeded from the professionally outraged.

Quoting the National Post article in question:

Bill C-69, which received first reading in the House of Commons on Feb. 8, would require that before a project subject to a federal assessment is approved, “traditional knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of Canada provided with respect to the project” be taken into account — though it provides no definition of “traditional knowledge.” The bill further states that when traditional knowledge is provided in confidence, it “is confidential and must not knowingly be, or be permitted to be, disclosed without written consent.”

A federal law of general application to the assessment of projects would establish, or fail to establish:

  • no definition is given of “traditional knowledge”, and
  • if presented in confidential format, no disclosure of it is required in open court.

The civil servant quite reasonably observed that

“to systematically place Indigenous knowledge on equal footing with scientific data “could prove problematic in cases where Indigenous knowledge and science are found to be in contradiction.” He said criteria should be established to evaluate the accuracy of the traditional knowledge.”

If I were an aboriginal, by these provisions I would be  enabled – for example – to submit to the Court confidentially that the Great Spirit has vouchsafed us a knowledge that He would be wrathful if a pipeline went across our “traditional” territories. It would be “traditional knowledge” if we said it was, and hence its contents would be unverifiable; indeed their contents would be unknown to the parties in the proceeding, they would be undiscussable, and the reasons of the court could not be made available if they relied on it, without written permission of the aboriginal group. So we could have a system of legal review that could not review the reasons for a government decision. A court could not rely on the accuracy or completeness of a record of a proceeding.

Anyone familiar with the trial of Galileo knows that he asserted that the earth went around the sun, that some of the moveable stars, as they were then known, like Jupiter, had their own moons, and that the surface of the moon was pockmarked with craters. The Church held that Aristotle was right, and that these three points were contradicted by the Great Philosopher. Yet in the case of Aristotle, the Church asserted a known, public doctrine.

So the position of the future Galileos in Canadian society is even worse in a way than it was for Galileo. Because you will be brought to trial for offending a traditional doctrine without knowing what that doctrine was, unless the Aboriginal band decided to make it public. To the uncertainty of what will arouse the wrath of Social Justice Warriors will be added secret doctrines, known to the initiates of tribal customs, and unknown to all others.

If you doubt for a moment it will soon be a hate crime to contest traditional knowledge, observe the accusation by the Ottawa law professors against the Quebec civil servant, Mr. Beauchesne, of “racism” for favouring science in a ‘hierarchy of knowledges’.

When I heard Jordan Peterson say that the social constructionist attack on knowledge will soon attack biology for contradicting what the Left says about race, sex, and other biological facts, I thought he might have been extrapolating reasonably. It has become my clear conviction that the days when “white science” will be attacked as racist, sexist, homophobic etc. is already underway.

First they call you a ‘settler’. Then they call you a ‘scientist’.

 

 

 

 

The Norwegian Special Olympics

 

Norway, population 5,336,297, has the following medal count in the White People’s Special Olympics. Norwegians are trying not to boast in public too much.

 

Total Medals By Country
Group G S B Total
NOR 13 11 9 33
GER 12 7 5 24
CAN 9 5 7 21
NED 6 6 4 16
USA 6 4 6 16
FRA 5 4 5 14
OAR 0 4 9 13
JPN 3 5 3 11
AUT 4 2 4 10
KOR 4 3 2 9
ITA 3 2 4 9
SWE 4 4 0 8
SUI 2 5 1 8
CHN 0 5 2 7
CZE 1 2 3 6
GBR 1 0 3 4
FIN 0 0 4 4
SVK 1 2 0 3
AUS 0 2 1 3
BLR 1 1 0 2
POL 1 0 1 2
ESP 0 0 2 2
UKR 1 0 0 1
SLO 0 1 0 1
KAZ 0 0 1 1
LAT 0 0 1 1
LIE 0 0 1 1

Aboriginal Representation on Juries

 

The Liberals just cannot help themselves.

There is saying attributed to Jesus that you had better get the beam out of your own eye before you try to extract the mote in someone else’s.

As the federal Liberals threaten to tamper with jury selection, and overthrow centuries of common law to make theft by Indians of property more easily achieved by the disabling the rights of landowners to self-protection, here is something you need to consider. The federal government has stopped making jury lists of Canadian aboriginals, so that finding aboriginals to sit on juries has been made much more difficult. The reasons are given below.

The Department of Indian Affairs stopped compiling jury lists because of privacy concerns. So says the website Lawnow.

Until 2000, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) compiled lists of First Nations persons for jury rolls. These lists were used in the situation where band electoral lists were not available. In 2001, INAC stopped providing band lists because of privacy concerns.  The key issue in the Kokopenace case was the Ontario government’s efforts to address problems that had arisen since the INAC band lists were not available, as this had an impact on the right to a representative jury.

The Ontario courts relied on a report prepared by Justice F. Iacobucci, First Nations Representation on Ontario Juries (2013) for data on why Aboriginal on-reserve residents were reluctant to participate in the jury selection process. Reasons included:

  • their views about conflict resolution;
  • systemic discrimination experienced by First Nations people within the justice system;
  • a lack of knowledge about the justice system and the jury system;
  • the desire by First Nations leaders to assume greater control of justice matters in their communities; and
  • concerns for the protection of privacy rights.

Additional concerns included some aspects of the content of the questionnaire itself (e.g. penalty for non-response) and the requirement to declare citizenship. The Iocabucci Report concluded that the ad hoc system for identifying jurors was ineffective, and thus, results in a jury roll that is unrepresentative of all First Nations peoples on reserve. While the report focused on the situation in Ontario, Justice Iocabucci noted that the problem with underrepresentation of First Nations peoples on juries exists in a number of Canadian provinces, as well as in New Zealand, Australia and the United States.

“Privacy concerns”?!

Here we see in action the confusion of legal objectives: “privacy concerns”, which are of distinctly secondary importance, are used to trump the availability of jury lists that could be used to increase the number of Indians on juries, which is, to Liberals, of greater importance.

The decisions cited in the Lawnow article make it clear that a jury is not required to be a random selection of all people, and that failure to achieve statistical representation of the entire community is not a bar to effective justice.

 

The Ontario Court of Appeal emphasized that the right to a representative jury roll is qualified. For example, “it does not require a jury roll in which each group is represented in numbers equivalent to its proportion of the population of the jury as a whole” This would be practically impossible and any attempt to achieve this type of representation would not work with random selection process that is used to choose people to receive jury service notices.

The Ontario Court of Appeal focused on the steps taken by the state to prepare a jury roll that provides a group of people, from which to select a competent and impartial jury. The test arrived at was:

In my view, [wrote the court] to meet its representativeness obligation, the state must make reasonable efforts at each step of creating the jury roll. That includes the state’s actions in compiling the lists, but also in sending the notices, facilitating their delivery and receipt and encouraging the responses to them.  The objective of the state’s actions must be to seek to provide the platform necessary to select an impartial petit jury and to maintain public confidence in the criminal justice system by providing groups that bring distinctive perspectives to the jury process with their fair opportunity to be included in the jury roll.

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal 5-2.

The Liberals just cannot help themselves.