"Increasing automaticity in certain aspects of American policymaking" is my new favorite roundabout way to say that we need a dictator.

Instead of just linking to stories by other people, Hail actually ran some numbers on dysgenics and more.

John Derbyshire:

The real jobs problem is giving some meaning to the lives of the—what? forty percent? sixty percent? eighty percent?—of the adult population for which an artificial-intelligence economy (self-checkout supermarkets, self-driving vehicles, remote-control warfare) has no use.

The warm glow of diversity. Incidentally, it’s pretty clear that Drudge is a race realist at this point, right?

Tyler Cowen wants dual central banks. This is the latest absolutely friggin’ crazy idea uttered by mainstream economists. I predict in the future – as economics progresses, as it assuredly will – that money will be created much like the Pope gives blessings. Mainstream economists will gather in secret and elect a world Central Banker. In times of trouble, everyone will pile worthless assets in a room. This Central Banker will enter, hold up his hand, and the worthless assets will be worth lots. The Central Banker will then retire. I can’t think of anything crazier, but if I could, I would predict that instead. Can I have tenure now?

Tino on immigration.

"South Korea abolishes itself."

Racial progress in South Africa has led to genocide. Congratulations, progressives!

In defense of staying married.

nydwracu – whom I haven’t been reading until recently, my apologies – on ungovernments and the American left. From the latter: "Considering the history of American politics, it is clear the American political theory is fundamentally liberal." This statement is a pretty good test of whether someone is a reactionary or a conservative. If you agree and you’re not happy with it, you’re a reactionary.

Ferdinand has re-posted some pictures from Cardiff.

Mangan has put up a couple interesting posts on Ron Unz’s long piece. See this one and follow his links.

Alrenous on democracy and freedom.

Isegoria digs up a great quote on race:

The idea that “racism” is a unitary phenomenon is seriously wrong. To select a paired set of example. Hitler was a racist. So, in a way, was Garnet Wolseley, a Victorian officer whose memoirs I recently read. But they were “racist” in totally different ways. Hitler was an ideological fanatic, impervious to evidence, hating a “Jew” that mostly existed in his imagination. Wolseley was an extremely practical man who had limited resources with which to conquer and hold vast territories and populations under the potitical control of his government. Hitler made up a fantasy world based on racial myths. Wolseley observed that certain groups had certain characteristics, as a general matter, and he took those facts into account just like terrain, weather, and weaponry and other practical considerations. He did not have the luxury of living in a make-believe world where everyone was exactly the same, or where one group was generically superior. Hitler told himself a self-congratulatory and flattering story about his own group, which led him to make incredibly impractical decisions. Wolseley looked just as hard at his own group, the English, and saw its strengths and weaknesses. He admired and extolled the former, but admitted and tried to work around the latter. He treated these facts about his own people with the same cold practicality that he treated all practical questions. To celebrate “culture” when it suits us or pleases us or flatters us, but to deny its reality and force when it does not, is ultimately dishonest. We need to understand people in the past as they understood themselves, not merely as chess pieces in our current struggles.


8 Responses to Randoms

  1. Handle says:

    You should do a post dedicated to Unz’s article. It is sober, and well-reasoned and deserves some serious thought and dedicated discussion.

    I should admit a bias in that I proposed a similar “humane attrition through enforcement of a raised minimum-wage plus generous repatriation assistance” mechanism 4.5 years ago during the last “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” attempt. I thought it was clever political judo at the time, using the Left’s reflexive support for minimum wage hikes to surreptitiously sabotage the long-term re-composition of the voting population.

    Alas, it suffers from the “static-frame” fallacy. It seems like a good, single chess move, but the question is always the dynamic one, “what’s the opposition’s next move? And the ones after that?” The smarter Liberal friends with whom I discussed the matter immediately began to brainstorm a welfare-based counterattack to prevent any exodus. The minute this starts to bite into their hopes of a permanent majority coalition, they’ll adapt to undermine it. Politics is a perpetual arms race. The night does not end.

    • Foseti says:

      I plan to read it, but I haven’t yet. It’s quite long. So far, it seems to have upset everyone.

      • Handle says:

        When you get to it, if you want an example of how my former Unz’s policy suggestion would play out dynamically in the shifting sands of our politics, see Federale’s commentary, for example, here and also check out his link there to a previous post on “public charges”.

        We have an Alternative Minimum Tax law, but every year it gets patched.

        We have a Medicare rule that is supposed to keep costs under control but it routinely gets the “Doc Fix” (now 25% out of tolerance)

        We have Obamacare and No Child Left Behind but then we issue waivers to those states or businesses about to run afoul of the law as written.

        We have rules for priority in orderly bankruptcy and which narrow range of financial institutions can ordinarily qualify for the special status required to access government lending, but when the crisis comes all that is thrown out the window and everybody gets a bail-out through discretion in interpretation.

        We have a minimum wage law that is enforced now, but should it conflict with a larger and more pressing agenda, then it too will go away.

        And we have immigration and welfare rules, and the minute they threaten to actually bite, the system always bites the rules back.

        Needless to say, this is not the rule of law.

        If I’m correct about the political-reaction risks involved in the minimum-wage gambit, (I’m much more realistically cynical than I was in 2007), then we’ll have an even worse situation. At least the bulk of the illegals in the country are actually working, which provides not just some economic benefit but improves cultural and social capital as well. Now let’s throw them all out of work but keep them here and put them on welfare and see what happens. ¡Ay, caramba! We’ve seen that movie, we know how it ends. In tears.

  2. icr says:

    I think the above quote portrays a comic-book version of Hitler.

    From my recollection of Speer’s memoirs, Himmler and Rosenberg were the ones who were into racial mythology and Hitler *mocked* them for that. I also recall that at least two of John Lukacs’ books dealing with Hitler tend to confirm Speer.

    I think Kershaw and others have established that Hitler’s anti-Semitism was of postwar origin. In the Table Talk, Hitler says that his objection to the Jews is that they are a “reservoir of Bolshevism.” The evidence of history (see Yuri Slezkine, Benjamin Ginsberg and Albert Lindemann- along with the usual suspects) shows that Hitler was not entirely wrong in this characterization. That doesn’t mean that any sane person would endorse his radical solution to the problem.

    As we’ve all been told, a lot of how English history developed is linked to the fact that Britain is an island. Put England on the continent between France and Russia and English history would hardly have been the same.

  3. Tschafer says:

    If “Evo and Proud” is right about South Korea, it certainly lends a lot of support to Moldbug’s theory that Global Liberalism was primarily an American WWII export. By the way, there’s some great new poetry over at MM’s site. This guy has to be the best modernist poet on the right since D’Annunzio…

    • Handle says:

      It’s hard not to be the best when one is basically alone. Not saying he still wouldn’t come out tops, but how to be sure if others don’t thrown down their own verse? Who’s going to organize the slam session?

      By the way, one Gabe Ruth left what I thought was a accurate yet melancholy remark at The Moldbug’s latest, reflecting on the lack of recent prose, as follows:

      ” … what else is there to say? The analysis has been given, the solution hypothesized. Current events are surreal, and perceived through fog.”

      I disagree. There’s virtue in theme and variation. And the self-reinforcement of a single individual is no less beneficial than the endless repetition and rediscovery of the same wise conclusions as has happened on countless occasions well before our time. I’m reminded of something James J. Martin said about the “Columbus Complex”:

      it’s a weakness of people in general who tend to be overly conscious of their own time and themselves, which is a natural propensity. People like to think that they are the discoverers of things … A large part of what people discover and advance in philosophical and related lines has been mulled over by the race for thousands of years. …

      The deeper you delve into things the more frequently you find that they’ve been rehearsed and mulled over and tossed around many many times before one’s time. … The less you know of what preceded your time the more likely you are to fall into this particular pattern of behavior. It’s a sobering thing to discover frequently that someone had your ideas long before you, and that they may have been published in a variety of places by many different people. It’s refreshing probably also to recognize that you are part of a tradition.

  4. Matt Weber says:

    I think South Korea shows that multiculturalism is really all about money. Despite all the left-wing propaganda, it’s the promise of lots of cheap labor and immigrant geniuses that really drive it. Diversity is just the attempt to smooth it all over. Even Japan, while remaining the one holdout against the tide, is far more open and tolerant than it used to be. It isn’t inconceivable that it will one day succumb as well.

  5. Federale says:

    Thanks for the mention Handle.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: