Friday, July 31, 2015

Colin Flaherty Gives a Round-Up of Recent Black Mob Violence

"Panic in Pittsburgh: Media Struggling to Ignore Black Mob Violence" at The American Thinker. Although most of the article focuses on the history of black mob violence in Pittsburgh, he links to articles and video from numerous other cities further in.

(H/t The Woodpile Report)

"Reveal Where Short Links Really Go To With These URL Expanders"

A list of tools for figuring out those tiny URLs without clicking the link.

"Make Your Own Urban Root Cellar"

This is a "root cellar" designed for an apartment or suburban home. Obviously, it is not an actual root cellar, but is a shelf unit hung on a wall that uses a couple buckets: one filled with damp sand (for storing root vegetables, such as carrots) and the other with water to provide humidity. Anyway, full plans and instructions are at the link.

ALG Defense 6 Second Mount

A couple reviews about the mount:

Iran Has Captured Iraq

This should be reported by every media outlet, but they are too busy with a previously unknown lion in Africa.  Jonathan Spyer reports at PJ Media about Iran's stealth take-over of Iraq.
In late June, I traveled to Iraq with the purpose of investigating the role being played by the Iranian-supported Shia militias in that country.

Close observation of the militias, their activities, and their links to Tehran is invaluable in understanding what is likely to happen in the Middle East following the conclusion of the nuclear agreement between the P5 + 1 powers and Tehran.

An Iranian stealth takeover of Iraq is currently under way. Tehran’s actions in Iraq lay bare the nature of Iranian regional strategy. They show that Iran has no peers at present in the promotion of a very 21st century way of war, which combines the recruitment and manipulation of sectarian loyalties; the establishment and patient sponsoring of political and paramilitary front groups; and the engagement of these groups in irregular and clandestine warfare, all in tune with an Iran-led agenda. With the conclusion of the nuclear deal, and thanks to the cash about to flow into Iranian coffers, the stage is now set for an exponential increase in the scale and effect of these activities across the region. So what is going on in Iraq, and what may be learned from it?

Power in Baghdad today is effectively held by a gathering of Shia militias known as the Hashed al-Shaabi (Popular Mobilization). ...
These militias, the author describes, are sole effective force standing between ISIS and Baghdad. And being the only effective military force, they also hold the political power of the country. Spyer reports:
In all areas, I observed close cooperation between the militias, the army, and the federal police.

The latter are essentially under the control of the militias. Mohammed Ghabban, of Badr, is the interior minister. The Interior Ministry controls the police. Badr’s leader, Hadi al-Ameri, serves as the transport minister.

* * *
 
The real decision-making structure for the militias’ alliance goes through Abu Mahdi al Muhandis and Hadi al-Ameri, to Qassem Suleimani, and directly on to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Spyer concludes that Iran's formula for success is via indirect warfare; that is:
... The possession of a powerful state body (the IRGC’s Quds Force) whose sole raison d’etre is the creation and sponsorship of local political-military organizations to serve the Iranian interest. The existence of a population in a given country available for indoctrination and mobilization. The creation of proxy bodies and the subsequent shepherding of them to both political and military influence, with each element complementing the other. And finally, the reaping of the benefit of all this in terms of power and influence.

This formula has at the present time brought Iran domination of Lebanon and large parts of Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Current events in Iraq form a perfect study of the application of this method, and the results it can bring. Is Iran likely to change this winning formula as a result of the sudden provision of increased monies resulting from the nuclear deal? This is certainly the hope of the authors of the agreement. It is hard to see on what it is based.

The deal itself proves that Iran can continue to push down this road while paying only a minor price, so why change? Expect further manifestations of the Tehran formula in the Middle East in the period ahead.

A Quick Run Around the Web--July 31, 2015 (Updated and Expanded)

17-34_A_large
USA 1-Shot Non-NFA Pistol "Buttstock" Go the article for more information, including
price and other firearms makes and models supported.

Various topics for your consideration:

  • "New LaserLyte Trainer." The Firearms Blog has announced that a new laser trainer for dry fire practice (it lights up when you pull the trigger). The primary changes are an on/off switch, it is shorter so it can fit in snub-nosed revolvers, and uses a different method to ensure a tight fit into the barrel. It would be nice if these corrected the serious flaws in the original product, because LaserLyte's earlier trainer sucked. (I would note that a few weeks after I published my review, my father-in-law returned the unit he had bought for substantially the same reasons as I had).
  • "7 REALLY Badass Weapons You Can Make At Home" at Survival Life. I don't know how practical or useful these would be, but they might be fun projects.
  • "How to communicate when the world goes silent" from Graywolf Survival. A detailed primer (is that an oxymoron?) on radio communications, including a look at CB radios, satellite phones, GMRS/FRS/MURS radios, and Ham set ups (including a list of frequencies for useful stations, a bit about the Ham community, and some methods of communication over Ham); use of repeaters; some sources on "stealth" operation of radios; and a look at some DIY radios.
  • "S.C.A.R.E Bag" at Dirt Time. S.C.A.R.E. standing for "Social Chaos and Response Emergency Kits." Not a get-home bag, per se, but a kit "to help you escape or survive 'People' and the chaotic events in which they cause– A small potrtable bag with just enough elements in it to give you just a second or two of advantage to escape and make it to a safer location."
  • "Is Digital Technology Destroying The Middle Class?" by Roosh Valizadeh. The downside to the information revolution.
  • "There is No Sexual Double-Standard" from the Hawaiian Libertarian. Remedial arithmetic for feminists. The key points being that under the paradigm of traditional marriage, there were two standards, one for men and one for women, rather than a single "double standard":
Men’s primary marital asset was their resources and ability to labor to acquire more resources, to support the family. Men with lesser means or abilities to provide were (and usually still are) viewed as less desirable marriage material, regardless of his sexual history.
Women’s primary martial asset was their guarantee to their husbands that children born of their union where his. Women with an openly promiscuous past are viewed as less desirable marriage material because of the greater chances of cuckoldry and infidelity, regardless of her ability to be a provider.


 (H/t to Dooms Day Prepping for a couple of the links)

Have a Coke and a Firebomb

Mvd6554431

The Truth About Guns spotted this photo in an article at Salon. Look at the middle bottle. The Coke bottle has printed instructions on how to make the bottle into a Molotov cocktail.

¡Viva la Revolución!

Note: Sorry about the overlarge photo. I tried publishing it in a smaller size, but it was difficult to see (besides, now you can read the "Yankees Go Home!" on the first bottle), and I was afraid that the editors at Salon would take down or shrink the photo once they realized what they had done.

The Religions of the Left

So I've written about how Christians are being driven from the public square, and forced to choose between participating in commerce or upholding our beliefs as to marriage and sexual relations. So what is supposed to replace Christianity? Various forms of cultural Marxism, at least at the moment.

In 2010, Paul Rubin published widely cited op-ed in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Environmentalism as Religion." He wrote, in part:
Many observers have made the point that environmentalism is eerily close to a religious belief system, since it includes creation stories and ideas of original sin. But there is another sense in which environmentalism is becoming more and more like a religion: It provides its adherents with an identity.

... [S]cientists, particularly evolutionary psychologists, have identified another function of religion in addition to its function of explaining the world. Religion often supplements or replaces the tribalism that is an innate part of our evolved nature.

... It is this identity-creating function that environmentalism provides. As the world becomes less religious, people can define themselves as being Green rather than being Christian or Jewish.

Consider some of the ways in which environmental behaviors echo religious behaviors and thus provide meaningful rituals for Greens:

• There is a holy day—Earth Day.

• There are food taboos. Instead of eating fish on Friday, or avoiding pork, Greens now eat organic foods and many are moving towards eating only locally grown foods.

• There is no prayer, but there are self-sacrificing rituals that are not particularly useful, such as recycling. Recycling paper to save trees, for example, makes no sense since the effect will be to reduce the number of trees planted in the long run.

• Belief systems are embraced with no logical basis. For example, environmentalists almost universally believe in the dangers of global warming but also reject the best solution to the problem, which is nuclear power. These two beliefs co-exist based on faith, not reason.

• There are no temples, but there are sacred structures. As I walk around the Emory campus, I am continually confronted with recycling bins, and instead of one trash can I am faced with several for different sorts of trash. Universities are centers of the environmental religion, and such structures are increasingly common. While people have worshipped many things, we may be the first to build shrines to garbage.

• Environmentalism is a proselytizing religion. Skeptics are not merely people unconvinced by the evidence: They are treated as evil sinners. I probably would not write this article if I did not have tenure.
 Michael Crichton had previously penned an essay entitled "Environmentalism as Religion Run Amok," in which he observes:

[More below the fold]

Thursday, July 30, 2015

Survival Pie Chart

Advanced Survival Guide has updated and reposted their article "Our Preparedness Plan Pie-Chart," which acts as a nice conceptual aid for managing the different categories of preparations and spot areas that you may have ignored. Fill in the center first, then work outward--"baby steps" as they say.

"Increase Your Defensive Accuracy with These Sighting Methods"

An article at American Concealed with some advice on different sighting methods for up-close-and-personal encounters to increase your speed.

Iran Won't Allow U.S. Inspectors



Not that the U.S. government was going to perform the inspections anyway, but the Iranians are also prohibiting any U.S. or Canadian citizens employed by the United Nations to participate in inspections.

Why We Carry Guns

A couple articles today dealing with the same incident--"Why Carry? Because Denial Has No Survival Value: Suspect nearly kills rape victim’s entire family," at GunsSaveLife.com, and "This Is Why We Carry: Maine Police Stand By During Murders, Arson," at The Truth About Guns. The basic facts (from the TTAG article):
Brittany Irish, on Wednesday, July 14th, was kidnapped, assaulted and raped by a man in northern Maine. She escaped and informed police as to what happened. She presses criminal charges alleging the same against the man who did those things.

Maine State Police don’t apprehend him. Instead, they call him up on the phone and inform him that criminal charges have been filed.

What does he do? He goes to the woman’s mother’s home and burns her barn down. Maine State Police arrive and tell the mother they can’t help her and they won’t post a trooper on the residence to protect her even though ALL SIGNS were there that an attack was imminent.

Brittany Irish and her boyfriend, Kyle Hewett, arrive at her mother’s house to see if she’s alright. They stay the night. The next morning, July 17th, at approximately 5:15 am, the alleged rapist and kidnapper blows open the door of the house with a stolen firearm. Kyle, Brittany’s boyfriend and father to their children, is shot down in cold blood trying to get his family to safety.

Brittany Irish is shot in the arm and kidnapped a second time.

More Thoughts on the Benedict Option

A month ago, I published a post entitled "The Benedict Option and the Death of the Republic," which, among other things, quoted at length from Rob Dreher's article in Time magazine that concluded that "Orthodox Christians Must Now Learn To Live as Exiles in Our Own Country" due to the gay marriage ruling and the overall conclusions to be drawn from it and similar rulings. In that article, Dreher discussed what he termed "the Benedict Option": i.e., "build resilient communities within our condition of internal exile, and under increasingly hostile conditions." Dreher's article at that time had few suggestions on how that was to be done. Since then, however, he has explored the issue a bit more in a couple articles at The American Conservative:

  • In "Benedict & the Omnibus of Options," Dreher discusses some similar options voiced by others, and then explains in greater detail the need for the Benedict Option. He notes, for instance, the following passage from Alasdair MacIntyre’s book, After Virtue:
A crucial turning point in that earlier history occurred when men and women of good will turned aside from the task of shoring up the Roman imperium and ceased to identify the continuation of civility and moral community with the maintenance of that imperium. What they set themselves to achieve instead…was the construction of new forms of community within which the moral life could be sustained so that both morality and civility might survive the coming ages of barbarism and darkness. If my account of our moral condition is correct, we ought also to conclude that for some time now we too have reached that turning point…This time, however, the barbarians are not waiting beyond the frontiers; they have already been governing us for quite some time. And it is our lack of consciousness of this that constitutes part of our predicament. We are waiting not for a Godot, but for another — doubtless quite different — St. Benedict. 
The retreat from the world at large is necessary, Dreher argues, because:

[The] moral discourse is incoherent today, because the Enlightenment project of grounding moral discourse in Reason acceptable to all has failed. “Reason” is often deployed as a concept that masks will to power. We cannot have a moral community without a shared conception of the Good, one that precedes individual choice. And that is our problem today: in our time, we cannot say in any rational or binding way what is Good, because we do not share the same story. The Good devolves necessarily from what is chosen to the act of choosing itself. But how does one know what to choose? In late modernity, what the self desires is what is right — an incoherent philosophy, and an inconsistent one, but the one that dominates discourse. 

Check them out.

"Iran's rulers urge a baby boom to double population by 2050"

The Telegraph reports:
Iran's divorce and fertility rates have settled at Western levels. In a country that claims to be a model Islamic society, about a third of all marriages in Tehran end in divorce. Meanwhile, the number of births per woman of child-bearing age has fallen from 7 in 1980 to 1.8 last year - below Britain's fertility rate of 1.9. 
In the first decade after the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran experienced a baby boom and the population became larger and younger. 
But the plummeting fertility rate has reversed that trend. Today, Iran remains a youthful country by Western standards, yet the average age of the populace is starting to creep upwards. Meanwhile, annual population growth - which approached 4 per cent in the 1980s - now hovers around one per cent, not much higher than Britain's 0.7 per cent.
David P. Goldman must be feeling a "told you so" moment. However, this merely makes Iran's situation more desperate as the number of military age men declines, and the number of elderly increases.

Migrants Attempt to Storm Chunnel

The Daily Mail reports:
Around 4,000 people have stormed fences and desperately tried to clamber on trains bound for Kent in the past three days - a deadly gamble that has allowed at least 150 to get to Britain but also claimed the lives of nine people. 
Migrants have said that watching their friends die will not stop them trying to get to the UK with one saying: 'It's England or death'. 
Today French police said an Egyptian man is in a critical condition after being electrocuted when he tried to climb on to the roof of a Eurostar train in Paris, suggesting migrants may be now trying to get through the tunnel away from Calais.

Last night migrants were still easily breaching the 15 mile fence surrounding the Channel Tunnel as senior MPs, backed by hauliers, demanded the British Army should be sent in to restore order because the French authorities had 'lost control'.
"It's England or death." England must have really good welfare benefits.

List of States Where You Have A Duty To Inform An Officer That You Are Carrying A Gun

At The Firearms Blog.

Submerged Town Revealed For First Time In 80 Years

Revealed: The stone ruins of St Thomas, an abandoned Old West town, have been unveiled inside Lake Mead thanks to the drought
Water levels in Lake Mead have fallen so far that the ruins of St. Thomas, which was abandoned to rising water in 1938. The article indicates that the reservoir has lost 60% of its water. 

The New Gun Rights Argument

American gun owners are beginning to respond with a fresh, powerful argument when facing anti-gun liberals. Here it is, in its entirety. Ready? 
“Screw you.” That’s it. Except the first word isn’t “Screw.”
--"Gun Rights Advocates Have A Devastating New Argument Against Gun Control. Here It Is" by Kurt Schlichter.

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

America's Latest Upgrade To Its Nuclear Arsenal--The B61-12

From the Grand Junction Free Press:
Standing next to a 12-foot nuclear bomb that looks more like a trim missile than a weapon of mass destruction, engineer Phil Hoover exudes pride. “I feel a real sense of accomplishment,” he said.

He and fellow engineers at Sandia National Laboratories have spent the past few years designing, building and testing the top-secret electronic and mechanical innards of the sophisticated B61-12.

* * *

The new bomb’s name, B61-12, reflects its position as the 12th model of what the government calls a family of bombs. It is descended from the first U.S. hydrogen bomb tested in the Marshall Islands in 1952, which used a plutonium bomb to detonate a thermonuclear explosion 520 times more powerful than the plutonium bomb tested seven years earlier – the nation’s first – at the remote Trinity Site south of Albuquerque.

The current stockpile contains five B61 models, three of which – along with one other strategic bomb – will be supplanted by the B61-12.

But unlike the free-fall gravity bombs it will replace, the B61-12 will be a guided nuclear bomb. Its new Boeing Co. tail kit assembly enables the bomb to hit targets precisely. Using dial-a-yield technology, the bomb’s explosive force can be adjusted before flight from an estimated high of 50,000 tons of TNT equivalent force to a low of 300 tons.

* * *

High on the list of aircraft that could carry the bomb is Lockheed’s new F-35 fighter jet. This stealth plane, designed to evade radar, is a $400 billion weapon delivery system that has been plagued by technical problems and cost overruns.

Ol' Remus's Posts and Thoughts on the Backlash

Even though Ol' Remus is no longer publishing the Wood Pile Report, he does continue to post links to articles that he finds of interest. I don't know how often, but it is worthwhile to continue to stop by his site.

A couple of the articles he posted to today were from a site entitled The Iron Legion. While it appears similar in tone to some of the political/social blogs I follow, it is clearly not libertarian or classical liberal (i.e., how I generally classify myself), but comes across as more purely conservative (perhaps what would be termed "classical conservative") than the lukewarm conservatives with which I am generally familiar. From the site's own description:
The Iron Legion is a movement that encompasses the men and women who wish to see a return to traditional values and preserve the identity of the European people. We are united by our blood, traditions and values.

Some will be laymen who follow and support us. Others will be militant reactionaries and traditionalists who believe in the reshaping of themselves and our world. ...

There is something very wrong with the modern world. A lot of people can feel it, a troubling sensation that something isn’t quite right. It might come to them when they are enduring the commute to work, packed into train carriages like cattle, or tapping their fingers on the steering wheel while they’re staring at the rows of glowing red brake lights in front of them. It comes to them while they are sat at their desk doing the same old things they did yesterday, for eight hours straight, desperately trying to pay off their degree or their mortgage or the credit card debt that they were promised would make them happy. It comes to them when they’re dozing in a room lit up by the television screen, when they are falling asleep in bed with their laptop. They know something is wrong but they don’t know what it is, but they know it is getting worse.
* * * 
Many people at this stage become trivially angry and frustrated with the modern world. Trivially angry people shout, but get no further. We are the men who have become deeply, profoundly angry. Instead of vainly shouting into the wind, we are plotting. We are organising and preparing. We are getting stronger and growing in number.

We are leading men away from the system they built but which has since turned on them in spite. We are building better men. We are building heroes who will shepherd our people through the current dark age and into the dawn of the new golden age. We seek to preserve our people, our communities and the wider Europa.

* * *

We are not a movement based on hatred. We are only concerned for the survival of our own people. We reject the modernist miracle of equality but we do not seek racial animosity or conflict. It is however becoming increasingly apparent that the elites, either by neglect or design, are inflicting this upon us against our wishes. The Iron Legion will be ready to defend and lead our people when this happens.

The Iron Legion has some basic tenets.

We do not believe in democracy. At best it is an unwieldy mob rule that runs contrary to natural law. At its worst it is an easily subverted and well disguised form of slavery and with the changing demographics of the West it will only get worse. Instead we believe in separating from a hostile and failing system. We believe in a hierarchy based on natural law. The Iron Legion refuses to be ruled by foreigners, plebeians and weaklings. We protect the weak in our community, but we will not be subjected to the bullying and implicit violence of minority activists and those who wish to drag our society into the gutters.

We believe that communities have a right to defend themselves just as individuals do. This right is based in natural law and supersedes the laws of men. Natural laws and rights belong only to those who have the strength and will to protect and uphold them. We are the strong.

We will root out leftism, cultural Marxism and other pernicious influences wherever we find it. The Iron Legion does not debate with the left. We destroy it.
However, the group obviously has an attraction to the erstwhile classical liberal, as evidenced from this letter in the Deringer Files explaining the author's advocacy of the group:
I only want a simple uncomplicated life… a little farm near the sea… some sheep… a few dogs… a fine family… that’s all really… I do not ask for much from the world… let me keep what I worked hard for and don’t force me to pay for things I neither want, need or believe in – even better. Don’t take away my beliefs – don’t criminalize me or label me an extremist or a terrorist for not wanting to give up my beliefs and my lifestyle and don’t force me to accept a perverted ideal… and we’ll get along great…

* * *

I am not a NAZI like those who want to take away my beliefs. I am not a fascist like those that want to force their perversions on me. I am not an extremist because I want to live a simple uncomplicated life… and neither are the rest of the men joining our cause. All the men I have spoken to feel the same as I do and are all pretty much as the men Simon has described that he has spoken to… we want the simple things… to live our life on our terms with the morals and values we have chosen to anchor our lives by… to preserve the traditions of our faith and our cultures… to have a family and to create and build something better… the thunder you hear is the sound of men gathering… it is the sound of civilization crumbling… it is the sound of us tearing it down… and building it back up… it is the sound of our Legion.
 Following the pieces, it seems clear why Ol' Remus referenced The Iron Legion site and the article from The Deringer Files, and others (including this one, "greece invented tragedy .... and, probably comedy, too .... the euro union money lenders ...."). The explanation seems to be in another article to which he cited, entitled "America at an Ominous Crossroads," which is a review of the book Shattered Consensus: The Rise and Decline of America’s Postwar Political Order by James Piereson. From the review:
James Piereson, one of America’s leading public intellectuals, introduces yet another interesting theory of history in his new book, Shattered Consensus. He divides American history into three periods of political consensus in which certain principles were widely agreed upon by the electorate. The first, in his view, was the long period of anti-federalism that began with Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and extended through the presidency of Andrew Jackson. It was shattered when the southern states extended the idea of states rights to an unacceptable limit by claiming a right to secede from the union. A bridge too far.

The second, he argues, was the capitalist-industrial era running from the end of the Civil War to 1930, “when the regime collapsed in the midst of the Great Depression.” The third was the postwar [World War II] welfare state that took shape in the 1930s and 1940s and extends to the present, “but is now in the process of breaking up.”

In the Piereson view, these regimes lasting approximately a lifetime, each accomplished something important and was organized by a dominant political party, the Democrats in the pre-Civil War era, the Republicans in the industrial era, and the Democrats again in the post-World War II era.

The crises that brought down the first two regimes were vastly different. The secession that brought on the Civil War was a constitutional crisis, whereas, in Mr. Piereson’s analysis, “the Great Depression was a crisis of capitalism.”
 [Actually a very specific form of capitalism--financial capitalism--which has again struck this fair country, but in spades].

His book draws its title from the author’s belief that we are on the cusp of another shift in American opinion equivalent in magnitude to those that occurred in 1800, 1865, and 1930. The consensus that is being shattered, he avers, is the climate of approval for the welfare state and internationalism that has swayed politics since World War II.
I doubt that the reaction will be limited to only the welfare state and internationalism. The cultural Marxists have gone several bridges too far, and the pendulum is beginning to swing back. If the Iron Legion is indicative of attitudes in Europe, the backlash may be even more severe there than here.

Quote of the Day

We ain’t free.  Your only freedom occurs prior to anything you do being noticed by the authorities.

-- James M. Dakin (h/t The Woodpile Report)

"The Shower Cap Solar Still"

The Neo-Survivalist provides instructions on how to use a cheap plastic shower-cap, bucket or trash can, and a small receptacle (it looks like he uses the bottom of a plastic soda bottle) to make a solar still for producing drinkable water from non-potable water sources. Check it out.

A Quick Run Around the Web--Circling the Drain (July 29, 2015)

These are all stories from today's main page for The Daily Mail:

"Knife Blade Steels – A Comprehensive Guide"

Thomas Xavier's article at More Than Just Surviving is a comprehensive overview of knife steels, and a must read for those that collect knives, or are shopping for a knife.

The Left's Deepest Desires

Jeffrey Taylor has penned a piece at Salon entitled "The religious have gone insane: The separation of church and state — and Scalia from his mind." Most of the article has to do with Taylor's disappointment in discovering that a report on deep religious belief being considered a mental illness turned out to be satire. Taylor writes:
But no! I was wrong! The fine-print disclaimer at the foot of the News Nerd’s page ruthlessly dispelled my elation: The story, like the others the site publishes, was “for entertainment purposes only,” and “purely satirical.” In other words, a spoof. The hour was not nigh; psychologists were not yet ready to diagnose firm belief in God as what it is: an unhealthy delusion. Men in white jumpsuits won’t be forcing the faithful into straightjackets any time soon.

(Yet would that it were so! Imagine, so many Supreme Court justices and Republican politicians, from Antonin Scalia to Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, disqualified in one fell swoop on mental health grounds from holding public office!)

* * *

Yet all is not lost! If the News Nerd’s APA story was a hoax, professionals are, nonetheless, taking note of the danger it was parodying. A San-Franciscan human development consultant named Dr. Marlene Winell, herself a survivor of a Pentecostal upbringing, has bruited the idea of “religious trauma syndrome” and established its symptoms as “anxiety . . . depression, cognitive difficulties, and problems with social functioning.” Kathleen Taylor, an Oxford neuroscientist, has proposed treating religious fundamentalism itself as a “mental disturbance.”

The cure, in my view? Talk therapy, otherwise known as free speech, focusing relentlessly on religion and its multitudinous, multiplying ills, to be administered by us to the faith-deranged. Treatment might begin in language they can readily understand. The best, most succinct notion to be transmitted to the patients: “The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without evidence.” The nineteenth-century British biologist Thomas H. Huxley, “Darwin’s Bulldog,” said that.

It’s up to us. For the sake of humanity’s future, for the sake of our children, rationalists need to be unabashedly “bulldoggish.”

The time has arrived to bark, and even to bite.
(Emphasis added). Keep in mind that Taylor is not some unknown freak, but a respected author, regular contributor to The Atlantic, and former winner of the Pulitzer Prize. His views should be considered representative of the liberal left. We have seen tens--nay, hundreds--of millions killed in the past 200 years in the name of socialism, fascism and communism--all atheistic ideologies claiming to be based on some form of scientific reason. Taylor demonstrates that not only is the left's thirst for blood not extinguished, but is in fact once again growing.

"Earth Will Only Have 12 Hours to Prepare for Massive Solar Storm"

Or so reads the headline from an article at Yahoo News:
Trains will be disrupted, power will go out, satellite signals will go wonky - that’s what we have to look forward to when the sun next has a melt down, and we’re unlikely to get more than 12 hours warning.

In a new government document, the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills has laid out its Space Weather Preparedness Strategy, outlining the risks of unsettled space weather as well as what it plans to do about them.

The document explains that the worst case scenario is a ‘coronal mass ejection’ - huge eruptions on the sun which cause parts of its corona to detach. The corona is the pearly glow around the sun that you can only usually see during a total solar eclipse, made up of plasma and rarefied gases.

The worst case scenario is based on the Carrington event of 1859, which caused solar-flare related x-rays and radiation storms. In 2015, a similar event could cause the national grid to fail, satellite operations to shut down, increased radiation on flights and upset to electronic systems.

The report suggests that there are three things the country needs to do to prepare for such an event: improve alerts and warnings, update power and communication infrastructure with failsafe backups and have a plan in place to deal with the effects should they come to pass.

As for you: the advice from the government is to prepare yourself for a solar event just as you would for any other natural hazards like floods and storms.
 The agency is part of the British government. The report is available here. In quickly glancing through the report, it doesn't appear to have any information on what individuals can do to prepare--in fact, the lowest level of preparation seems to be local government and emergency services.

The California Dust Bowl

I've stated in the past that the larger cities in California will weather the drought, but it will be the small communities that suffer. This CBS reports seems to confirm that view, noting that the small agricultural towns are drying up:
The epicenter of California’s drought crisis is in the Central Valley, where there are growing fears the drought could wipe entire towns off of the map. 
Wells are going dry, jobs are harder to come by and families are already moving, either to different states or even Mexico in search of work.
Read the whole thing. And sorry about the puns.

Bullies Have High Self-Esteem

There are certain advantages to reading a book which lays out the "big picture" over magazine or journal articles that of necessity are generally limited in scope. Case in point are a couple of articles on violence that I've come across in the past two days, as compared to Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature that provides an analysis of violence, and its motivators, across many different fields of study. 

The first article is what prompted the title of this post. CBS News reports:
Bullying behaviors are linked to higher self-esteem, social status, and a lower rate of depression, according to a new provocative study. 
Researchers at Simon Fraser University observed a group of high school students finding that bullies had the highest self esteem, greatest social status, and were less likely to be depressed, as reported by National Post. 
“Humans tend to try to establish a rank hierarchy,” Jennifer Wong, a criminology professor who led the study, told the Post. “When you’re in high school, it’s a very limited arena in which you can establish your rank, and climbing the social ladder to be on top is one of the main ways … Bullying is a tool you can use to get there.” 
Wong notes that many anti-bullying initiatives try to change the behavior of bullies, but often don’t work. This is likely because behavior is hard-wired and not learned, she says. Experts suggest that schools might expand competitive, supervised activities as an alternative outlet to channel dominating behavior.
(As a side note, I would point out that the cure for bullying--"competitive, supervised activities," i.e., sports--have generally been gutted because of enforcement of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which has been held to require that equal sports opportunities be given to girls as to boys, which has resulted in the reduction of sports programs for boys).

This confirms certain of the conclusions in Pinker's work, wherein he wrote that dominance is also related to mating success, and can lead to aggression. He also noted that dominance is related to self-esteem, reporting that psychopaths, street toughs, bullies, abusive husbands, serial rapists, and other violent criminals generally score extraordinarily high self-esteem, even narcissim. In other words, "[v]iolence is a problem not of too little self-esteem but of too much, particularly when it is unearned."

The second article is from Aeon magazine. It first sets out to repudiate two historically popular theories on why people can become violent:
At present, there are two dominant approaches to understanding violence. Both fall short. The first is what I’ll call the disinhibition theory. Maybe, the story goes, even ordinary people have violent impulses that are usually held in check. When their moral sense breaks down or is somehow blocked, they give in to their dark side. Picture the man who knows that beating his wife is wrong but who, after a long day at work, loses his temper and takes it out on her. Is he our typical culprit?

In 2007, the psychologist C Nathan DeWall at the University of Kentucky and colleagues published the results of an ingenious experiment to test this idea. First, they drained their test subjects of self-control. They wore down college students by making them resist a tempting dessert or avert their eyes from part of a computer screen. And? The students became more aggressive in their subsequent judgments and behaviours. For example, they were more likely to deliberately blast loud noise into the earphones of another person.

So far, so promising for the disinhibition theory. Yet the experiments detected a pattern in these aggressive tendencies: they arose only in response to a previous provocation. In the sound-blasting experiment, the aggression was directed towards a person whom the participant believed had given them an unfair review on a previous task. When no provocation was present, there was no statistical difference in conduct between participants who had been depleted and those who had not. In other words, the aggression wasn’t a random overflow. On the contrary, it looked like the test subjects were trying to get even.

Now, such experiments might well indicate that some violence is enabled by loss of self-control. But the disinhibition theory sidesteps the question of why we are motivated to be violent in the first place. The impulse has to come from somewhere, and the theory is silent about where that might be.

It might be worth pausing to ask ourselves what kind of answer we expect to find here. Does our propensity for aggression simply come down to a mishmash of various provocations and triggers? Or is there some universal, underlying pattern, a single key that captures the majority of violence in every culture throughout history? The latter option sounds like an ambitious goal for a sociological theory. But the second general approach to violence, which I’ll call the rational theory, is certainly ambitious.

On this view, violence is just a way to achieve instrumental goals. For example, killing rival heirs is sometimes a good idea if you want to be king. Whether it’s fighting among brothers or between nations, these rational-choice models predict that the likelihood of violence increases when its benefits go up or its costs go down.

The theory can boast some empirical successes. Richard Felson, Professor of Sociology and Criminology at Pennsylvania State University, found that the likelihood of fighting among siblings goes up when parents are present, because younger siblings are more likely to fight when they know their parents might intervene, thus reducing the potential costs to themselves. At the level of states, Vincenzo Bove, Associate Professor in Politics and International Studies at the University of Warwick in the UK, and colleagues recently found that foreign nations are much more likely to intervene in a civil war when the country at war with itself also has valuable oil reserves.

But once again, we find ourselves with a puzzle. People frequently resort to violence when, by any measure of practical utility, non-violent means would be more effective. As Baumeister and colleagues noted in the paper ‘Relation of Threatened Egotism to Violence and Aggression’ (1996):

Wars harm both sides, most crimes yield little financial gain, terrorism and assassination almost never bring about the desired political changes, most rapes fail to bring sexual pleasure, torture rarely elicits accurate or useful information…
In 2007, the anthropologists Jeremy Ginges at the New School for Social Research in New York and Scott Atran of the French National Centre for Scientific Research surveyed Israelis and Palestinians on the subject of the Middle East conflict. During these interviews, the researchers presented their participants with a series of hypothetical peace deals; some deals included material incentives for giving up disputed land. A peculiar inconsistency emerged. A subset of the respondents saw the disputed land as just another resource: they were therefore willing to trade it for financial compensation and sign the peace deal, just as the rational model predicted.

Other participants, however, saw the land as sacred, tied to their communal identity. For these participants, adding financial compensation reduced support for the deal. They showed elevated levels of anger and disgust, as well as increased enthusiasm for violence. The rational model cannot handle this kind of data. Adding material incentives should never make the deal worse, unless the relevant utilities that people care about are non-material in nature.
The author's conclusion is that people are violent because their morality demands it. From the article:
For me, the burning question was always about why people disagree about when and whether violence is called for. Why was beating children for disobedience more acceptable 50 years ago than today, and why is it more acceptable in the American south than in the American north? Why do Westerners respond with horror to the killing of women for sexual infidelity, while other parts of the world not only condone but encourage the practice?

To understand how attitudes could be so vastly different across cultures, I started working with the anthropologist Alan Fiske at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Together, we analysed violent practices across cultures and history. We examined records of war, torture, genocide, honour killing, animal and human sacrifice, homicide, suicide, intimate-partner violence, rape, corporal punishment, execution, trial by combat, police brutality, hazing, castration, duelling, feuding, contact sports, and the violence immortalised by gods and heroes, and more. We combed through first-person accounts, ethnographic observations, historical analyses, demographic data, and experimental investigations of violence.

The work was, frankly, depressing. No one wants to read about all the terrible atrocities that people commit. But it was also fruitful. We did in fact find a pattern in all the violence. There was a unifying theme, with all the predictive and explanatory power one could wish for.

Across practices, across cultures, and throughout historical periods, when people support and engage in violence, their primary motivations are moral. By ‘moral’, I mean that people are violent because they feel they must be; because they feel that their violence is obligatory. They know that they are harming fully human beings. Nonetheless, they believe they should. Violence does not stem from a psychopathic lack of morality. Quite the reverse: it comes from the exercise of perceived moral rights and obligations.
 Of course, this result is also inconclusive. For instance, it doesn't explain the mugger (which falls within the purview of the rational model) or the opportunistic rapist (which may be in the rational model and/or the uninhibited model). Moreover, it doesn't seem to explain the actions of sociopaths, which seem to act without reference to cultural mores.

While I had some criticisms of Pinker's work, overall it seems to do a better job of explaining violence by realizing that there are many different forces and drivers both encouraging and discouraging violence in a person or society, than trying to find a single motivating factor.

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

ISIS Attack in Florida Thwarted

The Daily Mail reports:
A Florida man has been arrested after allegedly planning to use a weapon of mass destruction at a Key West beach. 
Harlem Suarez, 23, of Key West, was arrested and appeared in court Tuesday after taking possession of an inert 'backpack bomb' on Monday, the Department of Justice said. 
* * * 
Suarez, a restaurant worker who never actually made a bomb, received the inert device from an FBI informant after giving him supplies to make an explosive with galvanized nails. 
'If one day...I get a day off... I can go to the beach at the night time, put the thing in the sand, cover it up, so the next day I just call and the thing is gonna, is gonna make, a real hard noise from nowhere,' Suarez allegedly told the informant. 

Venezuela--Prepare for Revolution

The Smithsonian magazine reports that Venezuela is about to run out of beer because breweries don't have enough U.S. dollars to buy barley and malt.

The Cooling Trend

Although we finished June and started July in the midst of unusually high temperatures, the last couple weeks have seen us with below normal temperatures for this time of year--something that is not newsworthy, apparently. But I've pointed to numerous articles indicating a cooling trend based not only on historic data (e.g., the pause in "global warming") but solar data and models indicating that we will continue into a solar minimum resulting in cooler weather--a mini-ice age--in the next couple of decades. So, it was with interest that I saw an article entitled "Mind-Blowing Temperature Fraud At NOAA" at Real Science. The gist of the article is that despite raw temperature data showing that the United States has been in a long-term cooling trend, the NOAA has altered the data to indicate a trend of rising temperatures. According to the article, "The biggest component of this fraud is making up data. Almost half of all reported US temperature data is now fake. They fill in missing rural data with urban data to create the appearance of non-existent US warming."

Related Article: "Fundamental Differences between the NOAA and UAH Global Temperature Updates."

Related Post: "And Even More Evidence of Falling Temperatures."

Update: I was reading an article about human evolution, and came across this casual comment:
At the time of the dinosaurs, the Earth was some 10 degrees warmer than today ....
And yet we are supposed to believe that a couple degree increase now will be the end of the world.

A Quick Run Around the Web--July 28, 2015

Today is a long list of goodness. So long, I'm going to categorize it into sections:

Wilderness Survival/Outdoors Articles:

Unless you've built a Teepee, it's usually impossible to build a fire inside your shelter. Ring your campfire with grapefruit sized rocks. You can't take the fire into your shelter with you, but you can wrap hot rocks in spare clothing and use them inside your shelter or bedroll like hot water bottles. You can also bury 3 or 4 of them directly under your bedroll to heat the ground. That gives you several hours of continuous heat and a good night's sleep. Exchange them for hot ones as they cool off. Be cautious not to use rocks from stream beds or lakes. Those are waterlogged and can explode if you heat them, sending sharp rock shards flying thru your campsite like shrapnel. (Don't ask how I know that).
 Food Storage

Self-Defense/Urban Survival/Military Related

Science/Tech

Over the past year, there's been a whole lot of excitement about the electromagnetic propulsion drive, or EM Drive - a scientifically impossible engine that's defied pretty much everyone's expectations by continuing to stand up to experimental scrutiny.
The drive is so exciting because it produces huge amounts of propulsion that could theoretically blast us to Mars in just 70 days, without the need for heavy and expensive rocket fuel. Instead, it's apparently propelled forward by microwaves bouncing back and forth inside an enclosed chamber, and this is what makes the drive so powerful, and at the same time so controversial.
As efficient as this type of propulsion may sound, it defies one of the fundamental concepts of physics - the conservation of momentum, which states that for something to be propelled forward, some kind of propellant needs to be pushed out in the opposite direction.
For that reason, the drive was widely laughed at and ignored when it was invented by English researcher Roger Shawyer in the early 2000s. But a few years later, a team of Chinese scientists decided to build their own version, and to everyone's surprise, it actually worked. Then an American inventor did the same, and convinced NASA's Eagleworks Laboratories, headed up by Harold 'Sonny' White, to test it.
The real excitement began when those Eagleworks researchers admitted back in March that, despite more than a year of trying to poke holes in the EM Drive, it just kept on working - even inside a vacuum. This debunked some of their most common theories about what might be causing the anomaly.
Now Martin Tajmar, a professor and chair for Space Systems at Dresden University of Technology in Germany, has played around with his own EM Drive, and has once again shown that it produces thrust - albeit for reasons he can't explain.
Tajmar presented his results at the 2015 American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics' Propulsion and Energy Forum and Exposition in Florida on 27 July, and you can read his paper here. He has a long history of experimentally testing (and debunking) breakthrough propulsion systems, so his results are a pretty big deal for those looking for outside verification of the EM Drive.
To top it off, his system produced a similar amount of thrust as was originally predicted by Shawyer, which is several thousand times greater than a standard photon rocket.  

Monday, July 27, 2015

Robert Gates Blows Up The Boy Scouts Of America

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) executive board approved opening up leadership positions to avowed homosexuals by a 45 to 12 vote. From the article:
“For far too long this issue has divided and distracted us and now it’s time for us to be united behind our shared belief in the extraordinary power of scouting to be a force for good,” Robert Gates, the organization’s president, said in a videotaped statement.

The resolution to end the ban on gay adults still allows local scout units that are chartered to religious or other like-minded organizations to continue to set their own policies on gay adults.
The New York Times has additional details:
The Boy Scouts of America on Monday ended its ban on openly gay adult leaders.

But the new policy allows church-sponsored units to choose local unit leaders who share their precepts, even if that means restricting such positions to heterosexual men.

Despite this compromise, the Mormon Church said it might leave the organization anyway. Its stance surprised many and raised questions about whether other conservative sponsors, including the Roman Catholic Church, might follow suit.

* * *

Many scouting leaders said they had not expected the Mormon Church’s sharp response and threat to leave.

“My assumption was that the concept voted on today had been fully vetted so as to avoid any unnecessary surprises,” said Jay Lenrow, a longtime voluntary scout leader in Baltimore who is on the executive committee of the Scouts’ northeast region and serves on the organization’s national religious relationships committee.

“I can only say that I’m hopeful that when the leadership of the L.D.S. Church meets and discusses the issue, that they will find a way to continue to support scouting,” Mr. Lenrow added.

Mormons use the Boy Scouts as their main nonreligious activity for boys, and the Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts units they sponsor accounted for 17 percent of all youths in scouting in 2013, the last year for which data have been published.

* * *

Some conservative evangelical churches ended ties with the Boy Scouts after the 2013 decision to admit openly gay youths. Total national enrollment of youths, which had declined by a few percentage points in many prior years, fell by 6 percent in 2013 and by 7 percent in 2014, to 2.4 million.

More departures by religious conservatives are likely, said Russell D. Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Mr. Moore expressed skepticism about the Scouts’ promise to let church-sponsored units exclude gay leaders on religious grounds.

“After the Scouts’ shift on membership, they told religious groups this wouldn’t affect leadership,” he said. “Now churches are told that these changes will not affect faith-based groups. Churches know that this is the final word only until the next evolution.”

But scouting executives hope that with Monday’s change they can renew ties with corporate donors, schools and public agencies and attract parents who had steered their children away from scouting because of the policy.
The LDS Church's statement is not fully set forth in the foregoing articles, but is available at the Church's website.  Despite the comment in the NYT article that the matter had been fully vetted, the Church's statement indicates that "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply troubled by today’s vote by the Boy Scouts of America National Executive Board. In spite of a request to delay the vote, it was scheduled at a time in July when members of the Church’s governing councils are out of their offices and do not meet."

Update (7/28/2015): I found an LA Times editorial from July 15, 2015, complaining that the (then) proposed change didn't go far enough. Ironically, the author predicted that the LDS Church would be in favor of the change, writing:
But many religious groups are more open-minded on this matter than people think; even the Mormon Church welcomed a 2013 decision to admit gay Scouts, an important statement because close to 40% of Boy Scout troops are based in Mormon churches.
So it is going to be a big hit to the BSA if the Church leaves, well beyond just its 17% of membership in the Scouts.

There is also this interesting tidbit:
At times, changes in Scouting tradition have cost the group dearly. In the 1970s, about a third of its Scouts decamped after a switch in emphasis from outdoors skills to skills such as family finances.
I've wondered about the fall off in BSA membership even before the "gay rights" debate because of changes to make the Scouts "more relevant" such as environmental merit badges (which require acceptance of the global warming hysteria) and merit badges or awards for video games, the abandonment of traditional field craft skills and merit badges (including the tracking merit badge--the raison d'être of scouts), and a rising hostility to firearms as represented by the increasingly onerous rules regarding the qualifications of leaders teaching firearms skills as well as using firearms (or even BB guns) at Scout and Cub Scout activities.

Update: The Atlantic has an article outlining Gates' long history of allowing homosexuals into organizations:
Eagle Scout. Young Republican. CIA recruit. Air Force officer. CIA director. Secretary of defense.

It’s not the resume of a radical civil-rights campaigner, but Robert Gates has now integrated two of the great bastions of macho American traditional morality—first the U.S. armed forces, and now the Boy Scouts of America. In both cases, Gates pursued a careful, gradual strategy, one that wasn't fast enough for activists. In both cases, he was careful to take the temperature of constituents. And in both cases, once he was ready to act, he did so decisively. ...
The article also notes that in 1991, he ended the CIA's practice of asking about sexual orientation, and while president of Texas A&M University, he appointed the University's first administrator in charge of diversity. As a good progressive, his concern was for "social justice" rather than the boys in the Boy Scouts. As one commentator quipped: "Giving a gay man charge of groups of impressionable young boys is like making a horny middle-aged cougar the equipment manager of a high school football team." So, who was the idiot that hired Gates to run the BSA?


Trust But Don't Bother to Verify

The Washington Post reveals:
President Obama promised that his nuclear deal with Iran would not be “based on trust” but rather “unprecedented verification.” Now it turns out Obama’s verification regime is based on trust after all — trust in two secret side agreements negotiated exclusively between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that apparently no one (including the Obama administration) has seen.

Worse, Obama didn’t even reveal the existence of these secret side deals to Congress when he transmitted the nuclear accord to Capitol Hill. The agreements were uncovered, completely by chance, by two members of Congress — Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) — who were in Vienna meeting with the U.N.-releated
[sic] agency.
And the IAEA is refusing to disclose the contents of the agreement, stating: "No American is ever going to get to see them."

(H/t Instapundit)

A Quick Run Around the Web--July 27, 2015

Running off the rails on the crazy train ... and some sci/tech news:

Greek banks are set to keep broad cash controls in place for months, until fresh money arrives from Europe and with it a sweeping restructuring, officials believe.
Rehabilitating the country's banks poses a difficult question. Should the euro zone take a stake in the lenders, first requiring bondholders and even big depositors to shoulder a loss, or should the bill for fixing the banks instead be added to Greece's debt mountain?

Answering this could hold up agreement on a third bailout deal for Greece that negotiators want to conclude within weeks.


Turkey and the United States are working on plans to provide air cover for Syrian rebels and jointly sweep Islamic State fighters from a strip of land along the Turkish border, bolstering the NATO member's security and providing a safe haven for civilians.
Long a reluctant member of the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State, Turkey last week made a dramatic turnaround by granting the alliance access to its air bases and bombarding targets in Syria linked to the jihadist movement.
Struggling with more than 1.8 million Syrian refugees, Turkey has long campaigned for a "no-fly zone" in northern Syria to keep Islamic State and Kurdish militants from its border and help stem the tide of displaced civilians trying to cross.
While no such formal arrangement has been struck with Washington, Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the two allies saw eye to eye on the need to provide air cover for moderate Syrian rebels fighting Islamic State.
My interpretation: We are seeing the results of one of the private agreements or assurances given in exchange for support of the Iranian nuclear deal.


The fiber, made from sheets of carbon nanotubes wrapped around a rubber core, can be stretched to 14 times its original length and actually increase its electrical conductivity while being stretched, without losing any of its resistance.
An international research team based at the University of Texas at Dallas  initially targeted the new super fiber for artificial muscles and for capacitors whose storage capacity increases tenfold when the fiber is stretched. However, the researchers believe that the material could be used as interconnects in flexible electronics and a host of other related applications.

"To Chaos and Beyond"--Thoughts on the Cultural Wars and the Deal with Iran

The Gates of Vienna has published an essay concerning the works of the French writer Guillaume Faye, entitled "To Chaos and Beyond — Faye, on Fate and Futurism." It quotes Faye as follows:

ETHNIC CHAOS

A historical situation in which a people or civilisation loses its ethnic basis due to the mass immigration of aliens.

Ethnic chaos was a factor in the decomposition of the Roman Republic and Empire, Pharaonic-Egyptian civilisation and many ancient Greek cities. Europe is presently in the grip of a colonising settlement by overseas peoples. A civilisation disappears once it loses its original ethnic basis. It becomes a patchwork quilt in which any idea of a city, community and destiny is impossible.

Ethnic chaos signals the pure and simple disappearance of a people and a civilisation — and of true democracy — as all of the classical Greek philosophers warned.

An ethnically heterogeneous population — a kaleidoscope of communities — becomes an anonymous society, without soul, without solidarity, prone to incessant conflicts for domination, to an endemic racism (‘every multi-racial society is a multi-racist society’) — ungovernable because there’s no shared vision of the world. Ethnic chaos is an open door to tyranny.

In the name of multi-racialism, capitalism and democracy have made ethnic chaos part of their programme. Men are stripped of their attachments and remade as consumers, each interchangeable with the other, each without an identity.[1] But this is stupid. Man never actually loses his memory or ancestral identity. A society of ethnic chaos leads in the long run not to prosperity, harmonious individualism or republican rule, but to political and social disorder. We’re now catching the first glimpses of this chaos. From it there will perhaps come the post-chaos — that is regeneration — a return to homogeneity.
* * *

 1. The destruction of personal identity is the singular, most important step, the sine qua non, imposed by a self-selected few, the new post-war ruling elite, who use their grip on the levers of power to dominate and direct human affairs in their own ambitious and pecuniary interests. By reducing all down to the level of the lowest common denominator they intend to create a passive population, or one otherwise perpetually occupied in low-level ethnic conflict, and thus create an easily controllable Global Slave State or, by another definition, The New World Order.
* * *
POST-CHAOS

Chaos is that state of disorganisation and anarchy affecting a collectivity of any sort once it’s beset by catastrophe. The post chaos is that phase when a new order is constructed on the basis of a revolutionary metamorphic logic. It’s the eternal cycle of life, death and rebirth as expressed in Nietzsche’s theory of the eternal return of the identical [2] as well as in René Thom’s [3] theory of catastrophes. The society we know can’t be fixed, the system can’t be saved. This is the illusion of every conservative tendency. The sole solution to the present situation will come from chaos — from civil war, economic depression etc. — that overthrows established mentalities and makes acceptable and indispensable that which was previously unimaginable. Only in situations of chaos are the given variables changed and does it become possible to establish another order — the post-chaos. Only in crisis, then, will a solution be found [4]. To construct a new home, it’s first necessary that the old one collapses. It’s not a pessimist but a realist who sees this.


* * *

Conclusion

I am now of the opinion that there is no longer any hope of finding a safe middle passage through the two perfect storms of the coming dénouement, our ruling classes and Islam; it’s a simple case of being caught between Scylla and Charybdis, and so one or the other, or probably both, will have to be neutralised. We, the Europeans, exist and they, the Slaves of Allah, exist, each in a state of total moral, cultural, intellectual and ideological incompatibility with the other. Furthermore, the current elites throughout the West have taken their position and cannot compromise nor turn back now in any way, for they have taken it too far. They know that for them to even take one short step down that road would be to expose their deconstructionist position in its totality and fatally shift the sand beneath their hideous treason, followed by the swift exsanguination of them and all of their ambitions.

We, then, the indigenous peoples of the Western Ecumene, must do this thing ourselves, without them, without mercy, hesitation or magnanimity. And do it now before we are demographically outnumbered and beaten into total subjugation or extermination.

As was the Restoration of Rome[11] effected by what became to be seen by some as Barbarian Popes and Imperial Contenders, so may we be viewed. But no matter — if we prevail we will be the ones who set the future course. History and those who triumph to write it always define the prevailing moral philosophy and, in the final analysis, it is an immutable reality that evolution is simply the end product of survival of the fittest. Those survivors, whoever they are, will be the heirs to the future.
Only too late are leftist beginning to acknowledge the monster they have created. As Aristotelis Orginos expresses in an op-ed entitled "Social Justice Bullies: The Authoritarianism of Millennial Social Justice":
But millennials are grown up now — and they’re angry. As children, they were told that they could be anything, do anything, and that they were special. As adults, they have formed a unique brand of Identity Politics wherein the groups with which one identifies is paramount. With such a strong narrative that focuses on which group one belongs to, there has been an increasing balkanization of identities. In an attempt to be open-minded toward other groups and to address social justice issues through a lens of intersectionality, clear and distinct lines have been drawn between people. One’s words and actions are inextricable from one’s identities. For example: this is not an article, but an article written by a straight, white, middle-class (etc.) male (and for this reason will be discounted by many on account of how my privilege blinds me — more on this later).

And while that’s well and good (that is — pride in oneself and in one’s identity), the resulting sociopolitical culture among millennials and their slightly older political forerunners is corrosive and destructive to progress in social justice. And herein lies the problem — in attempting to solve pressing and important social issues, millennial social justice advocates are violently sabotaging genuine opportunities for progress by infecting a liberal political narrative with, ironically, hate.
* * *
This particular brand of social justice advocacy assaults reason in a particularly frightening way — by outright denying it and utilizing fear-mongering to discourage dissent. There is no gray: only black and white. One must mimic the orthodoxy or be barred forcibly from the chapel and jeered at by the townspeople. To disagree with the millennial social justice orthodoxy is to make a pariah of oneself willingly. Adherence to the narrative is the single litmus test for collegiate (and beyond) social acceptance these days.
What is missing from Orginos' analysis is what happens when the pendulum swings back, as it inevitably does. As Faye notes, the balkanization of identity leads to chaos. There are those who, perhaps, believe that they can control the chaos; but that, too, is an illusion bred by contempt of those they are attempting to manipulate.

For instance, I read today that the executive board of the Boy Scouts of America is voting to decide whether to allow homosexual leaders into the organization--a vote pushed by the current BSA President, Robert Gates (a man deeply involved with several scandals involving misrepresentations to Congress and the American people). According to the article:
If approved, the resolution will allow Christian chartered groups to pick leaders 'whose beliefs are consistent with their own.' 
However, some gay rights activists have criticized it for not going far enough, as it still allows individual groups to choose not to allow a leader because of their sexual orientation. 
This is to appease conservative religious groups like the Mormon and Roman Catholic Churches which sponsor many groups and objected to the policy.
So, we see, even allowing local troops or councils to use gay leaders will not be the end of it; the SJWs will continue to push until the BSA either disintegrates or all groups are forced to allow gay leaders. Why the push after the BSA caved to allowing gay scouts? As I noted the other day, Moira Greyland explains:
What sets gay culture apart from straight culture is the belief that early sex is good and beneficial, and the sure knowledge (don’t think for a second that they DON’T know) that the only way to produce another homosexual is to provide a boy with sexual experiences BEFORE he can be “ruined” by attraction to a girl.
Obviously, therefore, a concession allowing gay scouts, but not leaders, would not provide the access of gay adults to young boys which the Social Justice Warriors believe necessary. But, as Vox Day pointed out, once this overall goal is widely known, the backlash will be sharp and severe.

But the threat of chaos extends beyond the hot-button social issues in the United States and Europe. Turning to the Middle-East, we see that the Obama Administration has made a deal with Iran allowing Iran to develop a nuclear weapon after 10 years, as well as numerous, secret, side-deals concerning other, as yet unknown, matters. Roger L. Simon sums up the primary objections to the Iranian deal in his article, "The Iran Deal: Weimar Days Are Here Again." He writes:
The Iranians made no concessions, only our side did, and we (especially the State Department) have lied continually to the American people about the extent of our concessions, most of which are hidden from view in side letters. But even if that weren’t so — and it is — the basics are clear. We have given Iran a pathway to a plutonium bomb while entirely gutting any possible inspections regime. We did this by abandoning the promised anytime/anywhere inspections for some bureaucratic mishmash that will take anywhere from 24 days to a year (depending on whom you ask) and by collapsing on the so-called PMDs (possible military dimensions) of Iran’s previous nuclear program, so there is no way to prove what is new and what is not in the first place. And to top it off, we have given the Iranians a signing bonus of 150 billion that, no doubt, will be used to finance either the Tehran branch of the Little Sisters of the Poor or another skillion mid-range missiles for Hezbollah. You decide.

Oh, and by the way, if we or someone else suspects the Iranians of cheating, the deal decrees that it is only the Iranians themselves who send us the putative evidence of their misdeeds. We don’t get to go there personally.

Follow? Well, you’re not supposed to. You’re supposed to go off in a haze. But it doesn’t take Donald Trump to realize this is a wretched, actually a crazy, deal.

But it gets worse. And excuse me for going off into the fever swamps of potential paranoia here, but what follows is the reason I wrote this article. I buried my lede deliberately because I have no evidence for it and because it’s so stupefyingly horrific that I can’t believe it, don’t want to believe it — and yet it rings true. I received email from a blogger I respect with information he received that alleges one of the secret letters is far more disturbing than anything disclosed so far. This document pledges to Iran that should Israel attack her nuclear facilities, the UN and the U.S. will defend Iran against Israel.
Simon uses the reference to the Weimar Republic to support his reference to the events of the movie Cabaret. The real historical parallel, though, is the government of Neville Chamberlain which engaged in a secret campaign to ensure Nazi dominance of Europe (as a counterpoise to the Soviet Union) at the cost of the loss of Czechoslovakia and Austria to Nazi Germany, and, if his plan had worked out, a partial disassembly of Poland, and a transfer of portions of Africa to Nazi control. Chamberlain's plan only failed because Hitler wanted to accomplish the same process by war rather than through international pressure and negotiations.

So, the question is, what has Obama sacrificed and why? Similar to the Munich Conference insisted upon by Chamberlain, the negotiations with Iran insisted upon by Obama must have as a goal the preeminence of Iran in the Middle-East.

The agreement reached by Chamberlain in Munich was that Czechoslovakia (without its participation in negotiations) transfer the Sudetenland to Germany, supposedly to prevent the outbreak of war (a war which wouldn't have happened since Czechoslovakia, by itself, could field a stronger army than Germany; and the German High Command was prepared, at that time, to assassinate Hitler if war broke out, and had communicated its intent to high level British officials). However, the actual outcome (and without protest from England) was the eventual absorption of most of Czechoslovakia into the Nazi empire.

In this case, the obvious sacrifice is Iran's security. My guess is that the immediate prize (and perhaps one of the secret side agreements) is that the U.S. has probably agreed to not stand in Iran's way in asserting its influence over Iraq and, perhaps, portions of Syria. The Administration has apparently decided to sacrifice the Kurds since there has been no objection to the Turks bombing Kurdish forces (perhaps, itself, representing a concession to the Turks). We do not know if any of the side-agreements promise anything to Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Jordan.

The why is a more difficult question. Undoubtedly, like Chamberlain, Obama seeks some lasting legacy. There may even be the expectation that Iran will be able to restore "peace" to Iraq and Syria. Perhaps Obama sees Iran as a counterbalance to Saudi Arabia and/or Turkey. There may even be some agreement as to the Palestinian question, and what the U.S. will do (or not do) vis-a-vis Israel.

Chamberlain's mistake (speaking of his strategy, not his obvious moral deficiencies) was that he believed that Hitler would be agreeable to gaining German dominance as a result of British beneficence, whereas Hitler wanted to prove Germany's (and his) strength through war. Obama, I would guess, is making a similar bet that he can peacefully satiate Iran's ambitions. Only time will tell.