As many of you know- I like to mock CONservatives, LIEbertarians and a lot of people who hold “alt right” views. Today I am going to target one of their more cherished beliefs.
You might have noticed that many of the above mentioned morons talk a lot about race, IQ, meritocracy etc with the pretty obvious agenda of suggesting that non-whites are not deserving of a middle-class lifestyle- based on their “low IQ”.
So let us begin the process..
Let us use the USA as a test case for their beliefs. According to government statistics, the median per-capita income of people in the wage earning age range as reported by employers was $26,363.55 in 2010. That is right! Half of wage earners make less than $ 27k/ year.
But here is the problem-
While about 72-73 % of the overall US population is white (hint: add all the “white” categories), the white representation in the working age population (over 18 yrs old) is closer to 80 %. This would imply that at least 1/3 rd of working age whites make less than $ 27k /year. Do you really think that this level of income is sufficient for a middle-class existence?
Moving on.. Did you know that only 25 % of wage earners make more than $ 50k/ year. In my opinion, a traditional middle-class existence in the USA requires a per-worker income around, or above, that level. If you disagree with the above assertion, please tell me how to live a traditional middle-class lifestyle for less than $ 50k /year in the USA- before taxes. Remember to factor in often forgotten items such as adequate health insurance, house taxes, utilities, a little leisure money and some cash for unexpected minor emergencies etc.
Today, a solid middle class existence in the USA requires a pre-tax income of at least $ 70 k/ year before taxes. I am talking about a modest house, modest new car, a few months of savings, good health insurance and enough spare money to take 2-3 weeks of vacations + eat and drink in decent establishments. However only 14 % of wage-earners make more than $ 70 k/ year.
There are those who will say- “but don’t families today have two breadwinners?”
My answer is- Have you looked around you lately? What does the ‘average’ family look like? The majority of marriages end in divorce and a rapidly increasing number of people are not getting married- at all. Many of these newer forms of partnerships (living together without ever getting married) are even more unstable. Now factor in big student loans and the effect of job insecurity and frequent layoffs. To make a long story short.. you are more likely to see the stable two breadwinner, solidly middle-class family in a sitcom than in your real life.
Contrast this picture to a generation, or two, ago when most white families were middle-class and a significant percentage of them were solidly so.
So what changed?
While the percentage of whites in both the general and working age population has decreased over the years, they are still the majority. Though their incomes have stagnated and shrunk as much as other racial groups, they were also at a higher point to start with. The cost of big-item necessities such as healthcare, housing, education etc have however kept on increasing faster than their income. Furthermore they are constantly nickled and dimed by everybody from the HOA, local municipality to corporations and the federal government. To make a long story short-
Most whites have fallen out of the middle-class, especially the large “solidly middle-class” group which was once envied by the rest of the industrialized world.
But how did that happen? If you apply the CONservative, LIEbertarian-esque and “alt-right” beliefs to this situation- one has to conclude that most whites (like over 70%) are not worthy of a middle-class lifestyle based on their IQ, work ethic, moral fiber etc. Which begs the question.. why did it work for them from the 1940s to the 1980s and even part of 1990s? Why then and not now? Did white people in the USA suddenly become dumb and immoral slackers? and how come other western countries such as Germany, France and some eastern ones such as Japan, S. Korea and Taiwan did not suffer a similar shrinkage of their middle-class? Did (or do) they work harder, cheaper or better than Americans?
The other unpleasant possibility is that most white middle-class morons gleefully cooperated with the “elites” to kill the golden egg-laying goose so that they would not to share it with non-whites. It is too bad that their beloved “elites’ saw pauperizing and abusing non-whites as the first, rather than the last, step.
What do you think? Comments?
These links are NSFW.
Caprice from HegreArt: Born to be Wild – A slim cutie with a very pretty face.
Caprice from HegreArt: Melting Ice – The same cutie playing with an ice cube.
Caprice from HegreArt: Climax Massage – Getting oiled and rubbed right by another chick.
More hilarity.. feel free to add your own take on this one.
This post builds upon an idea I have casually mentioned in previous posts. The basic idea goes something like this-
The type of government and social hierarchy possible in every single society is linked to the level and ease of interpersonal communication between its median members.
Consider a hierarchy ridden totalitarian society such as N. Korea. Its continued existence is only possible because the median person in that country cannot or dare not communicate freely with another median person. In some ways the situation in that country is similar to why old kingdoms and institutions like the catholic Church were so powerful even though they were tyrannical and incompetent.
For much of human history it was hard for the median person to freely communicate with another median person- either because of technological limitations or a gap between the level of technology available to the media person versus the governing tyranny.
It is not coincidental that the spread and acceptance of printing, newspapers, radio, films and TV are linked to progressively less tyrannical societies with increasingly representative governments. The internet is in some ways the next step in the revolution, but one that is profoundly different from its predecessors.
Unlike them, it is-
1. Very Inexpensive to use.
2. Ubiquitous in accessibility (place and time).
3. Searchable and Indexed in multiple databases.
4. Transnational and now translingual.
5. Contents can be stored at will on multiple media.
6. Hard to monitor and censor to the extent of previous media.
The modus operandi of “elites”, tyrannies, religions and governments throughout human history has been to maintain status and control through information flow between people. As I have previously mentioned, this was easy through most of history because the technology was crap or the method was expensive or somewhat easy to control.
Even the so-called “democracies” and “free societies” of the west and all of their institutions- from law and order to the medical system are based on an early post-WW2 era scenario. They assume that median people have telephones, read books and newspapers, watch movie, TV and talk in person.
They are simply not built to withstand the pressures, scrutiny, feedback loops and other consequences of the median person possessing and using a smartphone AND laptop to access a ubiquitous internet, search google, forward stuff via email, FB or Twitter and start blogs on inexpensive websites.
A host of other factors including the generational technology divide, changing demographic profiles, effects of real automation on job creation and the disastrous effects of financializing economies are contributing to a ‘perfect storm’ which is exposing the incompetence and inability of our current “elites” and institutions to solve problems. There are those who think we can overcome this situation through massive institutional reforms- whether it is electing new people, changing laws, rewriting regulations or similar actions.
I, however, believe that the problem lies in the continued existence of those very institutions.
These old institutions are not malfunctioning. Indeed, they are functioning precisely as they were meant to. It is just that their mode of functioning is not viable in the era we live in for reasons stemming from both socio-economic conditions and public scrutiny.
Institutions as diverse as schools, universities, municipalities, state and national governments, law and order (aka scam and repression), corporations, hospitals, news media etc are simply unsalvageable. However, their replacements will have to be created from scratch for reasons I have mentioned in a previous post.
There are those who think we can restrict or censor communication easily. Unfortunately for them, the technology of communication is so fundamentally tied up with the ability of a society to use technology, that screwing it up causes a logistical cascade failure making the repressive society much less capable. Lets just say that there is a reason why Europeans could colonize Asian countries so easily in the 19th century. Or you can look at countries like modern China which is losing the battle to contain dissent even though the government has virtually unlimited power and resources.
While I have considered writing an e-book (or two) based on my blog for a few months, events in my life had made it hard to devote enough time to do it properly- especially while blogging at the same time. However a fortuitous combination of circumstances and the purchase of a tablet has allowed me to start combining and refining my thoughts towards that end.
Currently I am thinking about something along the lines of how rapidly changing technology, ubiquitous communication, racial and demographic shifts along with the ongoing worldwide loss of faith in traditional authority and institutions will shape the world- and how it is already affecting how WE perceive the world around us. Let me know if you have any more suggestions or ideas.
I am still undecided about putting a price, however small, on the e-book. While I would not mind making some money off it, that is not the driving force behind what I do. My goals are somewhat larger than making a few bucks from my world view.
Another funny meme which combines two things I hate- those in the teaching profession and a certain type of cognitive dissonance typically seen in women.
Recent events such as the popular uprisings in the Middle-East and ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement have created renewed interest in the whole concept of non-violent protests. Here are my thoughts on the set of conditions which make non-violent protests a viable option.
Let us consider the movement for Indian Independence (from Britain) and the Civil Rights Movement (in the USA)- the two most widely studied and successful non-violent protest movements in the last century. While there are those who see non-violence as the key to the success of both movements- I think otherwise.
In both cases, it was the unspoken but very obvious threat of unprecedented violence which made the opposing parties (Britain and White USA) relent.
In India, the British had two options: deal with oxbridge educated Indians (including Gandhi) who led the non-violent movement OR take their chances with hardcore nationalists who would actively use violence and accept help from other countries. Given that the British administration in India was mostly run by Indians, the second possibility would have created a situation which would rapidly degenerate into a nasty and expensive civil war. The British government simply chose the much less expensive path of negotiating with the oxbridge educated set.
Any use of large-scale violence by the British in post-WW1 India would have almost certainly resulted in something that no party in the conflict could have controlled.
The civil rights movement in the USA was also similar in that the choice was between MLK-types and Malcom X-types. Would you take your chances with a charismatic preacher or an equally charismatic guy who believed that whites were devils? Let us also not forget that the treatment of blacks in 1950-era USA was a god-sent opportunity for propaganda by the ex-USSR. Any serious attempt to suppress the civil-rights movement would have radicalized blacks to a level where the cost of denying equality would be much higher than just giving them legal equality.
In the end, the US government chose to deal with MLK-types over Malcom X-types because it was less expensive. However MLK’s non-violent movement would not have succeeded if Malcom X-types did not preach a radical and violent path.
Non-violence succeeds only if there is an obvious risk of a much more nastier and violent struggle.
So there is unlikely to be any real change until those in power + their henchmen (and their kids) have to start worrying about getting killed or maimed without warning. Sometimes even that is not enough, otherwise violent revolutions would not have occurred in human history.
These links are NSFW. Enjoy!
Self Shots: Dec 22, 2011 -A few attention seekers
More Self Shots: Dec 22, 2011 -A few more attention seekers
Have you ever wondered if there is any cultural characteristic which spans diverse Asian cultures? Let me talk about one that is obvious, but almost never mentioned- Autism.
Yes, that is correct. I believe that Asian cultures from Japan and China to India are autistic. Some of you might wonder if I am implying that these cultures have a higher than usual number of individuals with autism. No.. I am not implying that- though that might also be the case.
I have come to believe that entire cultures can be functionally autistic.
The question which set me on the path leading to this hypothesis began with my innate dislike of Bollywood movies. Even as a child, I simply could not understand why Bollywood movies were popular even though they were so incredibly formulaic and repetitive. While many Hollywood movies are also formulaic, there are a significant number of outliers and even the formulaic ones try to appear less formulaic. In contrast Bollywood movies TRY to be as formulaic as possible. Hongkong movies are not different and with the exception of a few Kurosawa-type figures, all forms of Asian film-making and popular entertainment (TV, books sitcoms, video games) are very rigid and formulaic.
So why are they so popular in those countries?
Think about it- What kind of person would willingly watch the exact same stuff again and again. Normal people will get tired and bored of anything- even if they really like it. However those of an autistic mind love repetition and spend more time obsessing over details than overall meaning.
Cultural autism can also explain many other peculiar Asian behaviors.
Ever wonder why Asians obsess over money even if they have more than enough of it? Money is useful only if you spend it to buy what you desire while you are still alive and able to enjoy it. After a certain point making more money does not improve your lifestyle, yet most Asians (from Indians and Chinese to Koreans) are unable to stop obsessing about making more of it. But to what end? Very few people of any group will make enough to be filthy rich, therefore most of those who sacrifice their youth and happiness to make more money are “clever” morons.
But what if obsessing about money is a manifestation of autism (stereotyped behavior), similar to flapping your arms and rocking back and forth?
Consider food.. Indians are infamous for their obsession with vegetarianism and equating it with social status- inspite of its obviously negative effects on their health. But why would people keep on trying hard to do something that is obviously deleterious to them? Could it be that the urge to maintain a familiar, but dysfunctional, pattern supersedes any desire to act in your best interests? Asians will often reject or indigenize otherwise perfectly acceptable and tasty cuisine. Let me be clear- using a few drops of Tabasco on your side of french fries is very different from altering the fundamental taste of any food.
What if the Asian obsession with familiar tastes in food is linked to maintaining continuity rather than enjoying a better product?
The inflexibility of roles and behaviors in interpersonal relationships which are far more pronounced in Asians might also be seen as a form of cultural autism. Any person with more than half a brain innately understands that one size does not fit all- especially when it comes to relating with people around you. However Asian culture and philosophies are based on people fulfilling inflexible roles which may have been optimum in some previous era. Don’t you think that the rapidly falling birth rate in east-Asian countries and individuals is linked to their unwillingness to change many aspects of their traditional beliefs of how other people should live and behave? Similarly a lot of Asian uncreativity and deference to authority can be explained by the desire to keep things “as they were”, even if doing that is creating major problems and better ways are both accessible and being used by others.
What do you think? Comments?
Ok.. so LIEbrals are not as repulsive as CONservative scumbags, but they are still full of shit. Enjoy!
Here is a link to the documentary “Philosophy and the Matrix- Return to the Source” on YouTube.
Many of you wonder how somebody can say, write and act as I do without feeling any worthwhile amount of guilt, remorse, mercy or something long those lines. It comes down to one of my core beliefs-
I don’t care.
My position is based on the obvious (but often ignored) fact that the vast majority of people, causes, reasons and ideas you are implored to care about are either worthless or actually harmful to you. Don’t believe me? Let me explain with a few examples..
How has caring about women worked out for you? Unless you are a gyno, shrink, social worker or some government bureaucrat there is no benefit from caring about the “feelings” of women. Caring about their aesthetic sensibilities only benefits you if you are an advertiser or sell clothes. Caring about their physical safety only makes sense if your livelihood is dependent on it. Caring about equal opportunities for women only makes sense to those who make a living litigating it or enforcing laws. For every other man- caring about women in any shape or form is a losing proposition.
Consider work.. Unless you are self-employed doing something you really like, aren’t you busting your ass for somebody who is profiting from your toil while simultaneously trying to defraud you at every step? What is the use of being loyal or hard-working if it don’t translate into job security and proportionately more money? Does it matter if the world goes to hell if it forgot you even though you were doing your job properly? Feel like slaving for and blowing the sociopaths you work for like Piggy and 1STD? Believing in the work ethic is for losers who want to be willingly enslaved and cast away once they are no longer useful enough.
There are those who take issue with my open contempt, disdain and mockery of self-righteous whites. Some wonder why someone would continue living in north America, and enjoying the “benefits”, if they have such a strong dislike for whites. My answer is something along the lines of- I don’t care about the beliefs, rights and well-being of those who exhibit bad faith towards me. The very act of suggesting that I should be ‘grateful’ implies that they do not perceive me as human. Why would I care about what you have to say once you take that position?
In some of my earliest posts on this blog, I had suggested that anybody who works for a promise that is functionally unenforceable is a sucker. As some of you might know- many white “high IQ” morons constant drone about something called “future time orientation” being a mark of intelligence. This concept is linked to the idea of delayed gratification being linked to success in your life, or something along those lines.
Here is what I have to say to those who believe in either “future time orientation” or “delayed gratification”- SUCKERS!
To understand why I see them as suckers, you have to first list and then analyze the validity of their beliefs.
1. The amount of sacrifice and delayed gratification has a worthwhile relation with the quality of life.
2. Their sacrifices will be recognized, respected and compensated.
3. The very act of pursuing delayed gratification marks them as magically superior to those who chose otherwise.
4. Their act of sacrifice will have some positive impact on their future- directly or indirectly.
I will now ask a few unpleasant questions to the morons who believe in “future time orientation” and “delayed gratification”.
Does working your ass of to become a doctor or lawyer give you the time to enjoy the money you are making? Was the amount of time spent (and years of your youth wasted) becoming a high-income professional really worth it? The same is true for scientists, engineers and many other professionals who spend years of their youth slaving away so that they might be able to have a somewhat better car and house. Who gets laid more- the median drummer in a mediocre band or a neurosurgeon? Who has a better life when they can enjoy it- a guy who spends his youth surfing or some frail pale-faced moron who slaves in academia? I could give you more examples and rub it harder in your face – but that is not my intention (at this moment).
Then there is the issue about your sacrifices being recognized, respected and rewarded. Do you believe that the guys who wrote and optimized iOS and Android are making a fraction of the money their MBA bosses are making? Why not? What about those Chinese workers who assemble iPhones for a buck or two an hour? What about those graduate students who slaved to get something done, only to find out that their herculean efforts are worth a 41k/year postdoc- if they are lucky. What about programers, engineers and scientists who get laid off once they hit their early 50s?
and how does being a willing slave make you morally superior to someone who is not that stupid?
Finally, let us honestly ask ourselves- Does slaving under the delusion of superiority make your life any better? Does it result in substantially lower risk of divorce, a sexless marriage or conflict-ridden relationships with women? Does it insure that your kids will give a fuck about you when they grow up? Does it make bankers any less likely to steal your retirement money? Would the people who approve of you because of your current status not abandon you if you fell on hard times- due to no fault of yours?
So why willingly slave for somebody? What is in it for you?