Sixteen Volts

Recently while I was at the library, when I was checking out the shelf that had the brand new books in it, I noticed a little book which proclaimed to list the "best of blogosphere". At a quick glance, this book consisted of URL's to blogs grouped by topic, each URL followed by a short text describing what the blog is all about. Frankly, I am now at a total loss why this information had to be published in a book form, as opposed to having a web page that contains the same information. Anybody who can benefit from this book necessarily has an Internet connection and a web browser, yes? A web page can be updated and edited, unlike a book that is completely static once it comes out of the printer. The mere existence of this book is an affront, a spit in the face of everything that I believe the Internet and the blogosphere to be about. Ilkka no understand. Ilkka very angry. Arrr! Ilkka smash!

Information about blogs is best delivered in the blog form, bypassing the dead trees completely. First, we note that it is time for another Carnival of Feminists, which has reached its twentieth edition already. Yay for feminism! The unifying themes of today's edition seem to be "feminists are socialists" and "feminists are losers", plus demonstrating the truth of Tommi's ideas that I translated in the post "The religion of women". Well, I certainly don't mind if feminists themselves want to bring forth these utterly obvious truths, instead of me having to point them out for the reading public! As I have often said, the grander the schemes for the total reorganization of society, the less ability that person in general has of successfully managing his or her own life. The posts that this carnival links to provide scores of supporting data points for this empirical observation of mine.

There is no need for me to really to link to individual posts of this carnival since you can pretty much click on any one of them and be entertained in many levels at once, but even so, I'd like to point out the new-to-me feminist blogger Amananta who tells us in her about page that

While I make an attempt, I will never promise to always be "reasonable" or "logical". Logic, reason, and philosophy are standards of truth created by and promoted by men who hate women. Aristotle, Plato, and all the rest of those "great thinkers" considered to be the fount of wisdom, the proper sources to find the basis for a good debate or argument, etc., all hated women, considered them subhuman, dirty, and worthless. I don't see any reason why I should worship their ideas.

Kudos for Amananta for being honest and saying explicitly what most feminists are only saying implicitly through their writings, namely that Larry Summers was essentially right. Why are women and especially feminists so underrepresented in reality-based sciences? Why does the ugly stereotype of women being emotional and illogical and men being more rational and logical still persist? The mystery deepens. But while we are furiously pondering this awful conundrum, here is a free hint for all loser feminists: when you work for a living instead of collecting welfare cheques and avoid popping out crotchfruit for all those thugs (no matter how violent and exciting these men are), you won't need to endure the dangers of living in Crackton, the inefficiences of the welfare system, or the humiliations caused by your poverty and inability to fully participate in consumerism. And what's with all those complaints of everything being so slow and taking such a long time? What, are you in a hurry for work or something?

Feminists are constantly whining how it is too difficult to successfully prosecute rape accusations, so to correct this injustice they think that the burden of proof should be lowered in rape cases, and the whole presumption of innocence thing should be done away with. Of course, this will lead to situations such as the one depicted in "This News Story Is Difficult To Read" at "Feminist Law Professors". But hey, innocent men sent to jail is a heavy price that feminists are willing to pay for the greater good. You just can't help but admire the feminists for their willingness to sacrifice.

By the way, I find it funny how the gang that normally wails the loudest about the death penalty being used to execute innocent people then seems to have no problem with sending innocent men to prison for rape. When it comes to murderers who kill cops and middle-class normos, the leftists want a hundred guilty men walk free rather than one innocent man convicted, but when it comes to rapists who rape women, they suddenly totally reverse their tune! I wonder why that is? (Rhetorical.) But to this whole thing I simply say that if death penalty should be banned because some innocent people might some day be executed for murders they didn't commit, then all leftism should also be banned, for the exact same reason except about a million times more! After all, how many innocent people did socialism kill in the 20th century --- wasn't it something like a hundred million, plus about a billion or two more doomed into poverty and misery so horrible that we can't really even imagine it today?

In Britain, Eternal Bachelor points out the blatant double standard when it comes to crimes committed by women, in the post "Stop locking up women!" Simply put, men are punished, women are treated. Hey, perhaps we could try the ideas offered in "Call for women's prison closures" first for the male rapists, giving them "therapy" and "community treatment" instead of jail time. Only after that has turned out to work, we could try the same approach for other criminals. How would that sound to you, all you leftists who just love all criminals as long as they don't threaten you or the groups that you identify with?

That's enough of femo-socialism. Back in the saner world, Half Sigma has an excellent post about "Labor force cartels" and other cartels in general. It's strange that cartels that try to jack up the price of some product are illegal... except when that product is labour, in which case participating in the cartel almost becomes your civic duty! As interesting as cartels are as an abstract phenomena (by the way, the Wikipedia article "Cartel" doesn't explain why every cartel is inherently unstable and necessarily needs enforcement mechanism to keep its members in line), I also tend to find the asymmetries between employers and workers in general very interesting. For example, why is it that in general jobseekers have to look for jobs and apply for them while the employer does the selection from the applicants, instead of the employers looking for jobseekers and applying for them so that each workers would select a job from those offered to him? (This question is essentially isomorphic to the question why men have to pursue women, instead of the other way around.) Similarly, why are employers allowed to discriminate based on only very few reasons in their hiring decisions (for example, the school that the applicant went to) while the jobseekers can freely discriminate against employers based on any attribute they like to use for this purpose?

Next, we can move on to current events. Hollywood has a big heart and is able to forgive many things, such as raping a 13-year-old girl and then escaping prosecution to Europe, or triumphantly posing on the enemy AA gun while your country is at war, or marrying your adopted stepdaughter. But some things are simply unacceptable. I was eventually going to ask something about the inherent absurdity of Mel Gibson never being able to work in Hollywood again even though Jews don't control Hollywood, but then I noticed that we already went through this zen-like paradox with Marlon Brando, as was pointed out by Saturday Night Live Weekend Update back when that happened. John Derbyshire offers additional thoughts about the Mel Gibson debacle in his "July Diary". Vox Day also has two posts about the topic, "Didn't they try that already?" and "Podhoretz the Younger on acceptable anti-semitism".

The site "God is Imaginary" seems to belong at least a little bit to the camp of "people who have too much free time on their hands", but its contents are solid nonetheless.

Interracial marriage is often a controversial topic, especially if white men participate in it, in which case it is evil. The interview "Japanese Women's Diaspora" shows us one point of view. I especially loved the little chart that accompanies the article. The market reality is not optional and can be ignored only at your own peril!

Feminists and leftists also tend to hate and look down upon the middle class and the unenlightened and boorish normos therein. According to the news article "Rich, Poor Live Poles Apart in L.A. as Middle Class Keeps Shrinking", there is at least one place where their wish of getting rid of the middle class is rapidly becoming reality. Good, I say, since it's time to remind people of the real value of the middle class. Of course, most people know this already when they try to decide where to buy a home, but it's good to have explicit reminders. In fact, like Tommi once asked, why isn't there a state or a country for each group or ideology, so that we could see for ourselves which groups and ideologies really work.

Speaking of Tommi, in his recent new post he suggests that some sufferer of coprolalia should apply for a teaching job in an elementary school, and when he is turned down, he should sue the school for illegal discrimination against people with disabilities. It would be fun to watch. If this doesn't happen in real life, perhaps the writers of South Park could create a whole episode around this idea.

Tommi's old observation of how "racism" can be easily defined as somebody having the same views about brown people as the typical anti-war marcher has about Israel is also rather apt, especially these days. Come on, it's not like Mel Gibson said anything when drunk that the Western leftists haven't been saying for years when sober. So I have to say that I am a bit puzzled about their huffy and puffy reaction of holier-than-thou schadenfreude, as exemplified by Ari Gold's much-linked condemnation piece "The Bottom Line on Mel Gibson's Anti-Semitic Remarks" in The Huffington Post. You sure know you are in the presence of powerful forces when you get a Jew to say that some things are more important than money! Thank you, I'll be here all week.

Speaking of anti-war marchers, the post "Helsingin Sanomat sensuroi tietoja muslimien mielipiteistä" at the Finnish libertarian blog fi-lib shows us a news photograph that was published by Helsingin Sanomat, the largest national newspaper in Finland. (My American readers might find it amusing that the criticism of this newspaper is very similar to that aimed at New York Times.) These marchers, despite the march taking place in Finland, sure don't look like Finland to me. But I've been away for a while, so I might remember it wrong. For my readers who don't speak Finnish, the two signs in the picture say "Israel is a rogue state" and "Hands off Lebanon, unconditional ceasefire now". But then again, maybe you already guessed that. At the right edge of the photograph there is a sign that you can only see the left side of. Can you guess how this sign that the editor for some reason decided to crop halfway continued after the equality symbol?

Michael Williams links to La Griffe du Lion, the pseudonymous statistician that Steve Sailer has occasionally mentioned but whose work I have never really looked at. Good thing that I didn't, since based on the titles such as "Sex Differences in Mathematical Aptitude", his work and results look very hateful, divisive and discriminatory, and should therefore be condemned and shunned by all right-thinking people.

Posted by Ilkka Kokkarinen on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 3:45 PM