West Virginia & Nebraska Primary Results

VW & NE Primary Results

Trump continues to roll towards clinching the Republican nomination. He’s now only 150 delegates and a general election away from Making America Great Again. There’s not much to say in this regard. Suffice it to say that I eagerly await the Trumpening and his formal coronation in July, not least of all for the soul-rending pain that it will cause naysaying cuckservatives and pleb tier progs alike. #MAGA2016

Sanders did excellently in West Virginia, capturing 51.4% of the vote and 16 delegates. His win came as a shock to no one but the Shillary drones. It’s not hard to see how Sanders’ folksy, avuncular style and staunchly populist platform would be more appealing to solidly working class Appalachian types than Clinton’s elitist & corporatist stance. Sanders has been gradually gaining on Clinton and trails behind her only by 286 delegates. Presently, he is 953 delegates away from nomination. While it is the case that Clinton carries the bulk of the Party’s superdelegates, it’s also abundantly clear from the numbers that a Sanders nomination is far from an impossibility. In the absence of superdelegates, it would be a distinct probability. Sanders has a demonstrated track record of success and has been steadily closing the Clinton-Sanders delegate gap, which makes the repeated calls for him to drop out all the more puzzling.

It is my personal opinion that Sanders would prove a more difficult foe for Trump to vanquish than Hillary. He has fewer defects of character, is also anti open-borders poz (albeit for shitty commiejewfuck reasons), and offers a smorgasbord of gibsmedat for the enticement of his rainbow coalition of economically illiterate constituents. I believe that he would be more difficult for Trump to defeat because like Trump, he is highly effective at cutting through the autism of data and appealing to voters on a limbic, emotional level-something that Madame Nehru Jacket is utterly incapable of. 2016 will not be an election year decided on the basis of sterile facts and figures; it will be an election year powered by principles and vision.


Standardized Tests are Intelligence Tests

The presumptive validity of equality has become an aphorism: everyone is of equal potentiality, any divergence in outcomes is due exclusively to environmental factors. It is an article of faith in the Church of Latter Day Leftist; adherents must mindlessly repeat the mantra when bidden to demonstrate their full internalization of the dogma. Nevertheless, equality doggerel cannot withstand even the most casual scrutiny. Once the data emerges, the entire house of cards collapses upon itself. There is nothing that causes scales to fall from eyes faster than a face to face meeting with standardized test data. The Left, knowing full well that perfect information is the enemy of good progs, has descended upon standardized testing in an effort to discredit them and remove them from use lest they yield results. . . incompatible with the narrative of equality.

Standardized tests are regularly maligned in memelike fashion: “standardized tests don’t accurately gauge subject matter mastery!” “You can’t prove comprehension based on test performance!” Naturally, any mention of viable alternatives is always curiously absent from these discussions. Nonetheless, the one opposing argument that has always managed to garner the most traction is the perennially persuasive “standardized tests aren’t tests of intelligence, and to presume that they are is racist!” line of argumentation. Really just a portmanteau of two far less sophisticated arguments, (1) tests are bad and (2) everything be wacis,’ the synthesis imbues these two bald & brain-dead assertions with a certain gravitas.

Standardized testing is under assault because it demonstrates that there are very real and very appreciable differences between groups as it pertains to educational performance and fundamentally, to intelligence. We are not equal, different groups have differing capabilities, inequality will never be rooted out because it is the fundamental condition of man: widespread acceptance of these obvious truths would present a direct challenge to the prevailing narrative of “we’d all be equal but for da white man.”

It was once understood that standardized tests serve a dual function: there was a character building component and a diagnostic component. Character building, as the looming spectre of these exams encouraged children to apply themselves to a task at hand, to identify gaps in knowledge and to work on filling those gaps until mastery was achieved and thorough understanding was secured, and to occasionally deal with the body blow of failure. Diagnostic, in that these exams provided school administrators with the data necessary to track students and provide them with curricula more tailored to their abilities and needs. Standardized testing demonstrated the importance of – having standards. Nowadays, the mere suggestion of the existence of objective standards for anything rustles jimmies to the moon and back. Standardization is unfaaaaaair because not everyone learns in the same manner! But yet, we are all still equal. It’s fascinating how that works, really.

Historically, it was once a given that those who reached and occasionally exceeded the baseline standards set by these exams were naturally the more intelligent. Those individuals would be rightfully slated for greater challenges and more opportunity, as they would be the only ones in possession of the raw g necessary to capitalize upon them. It was tacitly understood that the native English speaker who struggled to achieve a score of 55% on the state English test was probably not the brightest bulb in the pack, and that the kind and considered approach to his education would be to properly track him and obtain for him the help that he required. The response to test underperformance would not be to scrap the test entirely; it would be to use the data generated to ensure that all students received the most ability appropriate education. In an age of untruths and envy, however, everything must be reduced to the lowest common denominator in order to accommodate the dregs at the expense of the cream.

If we are being completely honest with ourselves, we must admit that standardized tests are crucial because they actually gauge intelligence in subtle ways. I have never been a fan of the “read and regurgitate” model of education that has been adopted by the American public school system, and I am even less of a fan of the federalization of education that occurred as a result of No Child Left Behind. I believe that the law has only served to strip education of its erstwhile local character and instructors of their autonomy. Nevertheless, it is clear that what standardized tests actually test for are such things as pattern recognition, predictive capabilities, the ability to make connections between seemingly discrete things, memorization/recall, extemporaneous problem solving abilities, the ability to reproduce a set of results under test conditions, and general cognition. These capabilities are all functions of intelligence, even if the tests themselves are only designed to probe for subject matter facility. The more intelligent one is, the likelier it becomes that one will excel at standardized tests because they are generally (surreptitiously) g-loaded undertakings. As intelligence is largely hereditary and unevenly distributed across peoples, education is ineffectual in generating intelligence where none exists. This also means that certain groups will by and large never excel at test taking or academic pursuits more generally.

Given these stark realities, the rise of the anti-testing zeitgeist was an inevitability, propelled by individuals willing to do whatever it took to obscure the mental limitations of their pet populations in order to continue to be able to plausibly assert that poor test performance is actually the result of the legacy of slavery, institutional oppression, poverty, culturally biased tests, or [insert flavor of the week buzzword here] to be remedied only by continual gibs transferences. But the answer is really far more simple, and rather elegant in its simplicity: some people just aren’t as smart as others. Intelligence will enable test takers to power through material that they may not completely understand by forging conceptual links that less intelligent test takers with similar handicaps are incapable of forging.

Consider for example the infamous SAT problem presented in Herrnstein & Murray’s 1994 The Bell Curve. The question was from the now-phased out Analogies portion of the exam:

runner: marathon

a. envoy: embassy

b. martyr: massacre 

c. oarsman: regatta

d. referee: tournament

e. horse: stable

The model, as we know is a is to b as c is to d. To answer this question correctly, the successful test taker would first have to accurately characterize the nature of the relationship between runner and marathon and then select the corresponding relationship from the list of options that followed. The answer is obviously c. oarsman: regatta. Anti-testers would (incorrectly, in my view) assert that it would be impossible for an inner city black kid to know what a regatta is and thus would be likelier to come to an incorrect solution. Voila: these tests are culturally biased and thus irrelevant. However, I contend that it is not necessary to know what a regatta is in this instance. The intelligent kid would accurately perceive that the basic relationship between runner and marathon is that a runner competes in a marathon (or does a marathon).

The more intelligent test taker would then methodically disqualify the options that clearly do not mimic the competitor-competition relationship proffered in the example. Thus, even while the test taker may not necessarily know what a regatta is, he knows for certain that an envoy does not compete in an embassy, that a martyr does not compete in a massacre, that a referee does not compete in a tournament and that a horse does not compete in a stable. As it turns out, the inner city tends to have high concentrations of individuals largely incapable of employing such rationalist approaches.

The goal behind the anti-testing movement is not cultural sensitivity, or concern for students. The goal is the complete obliteration of standards and objectivity. Their goal is ultimately the denial of intelligence as a concept.

Heroin, Harm Reduction, and Self-Defeating Leftists

As it relates to progressivism/leftism, there are two observations that we frequently make in these parts:

  • progressivism necessitates governmental expansion
  • progressivism makes possible the political entrenchment of corporatist & globalist interests that do not have humanity’s best interests at heart.

For these reasons alone, progressivism is an incredibly virulent agent of unfreedom and destruction that must be combated at every opportunity.

The thing about progressivism that I’ve always thought curious is the disconnect between the policies that progressives support and the consequent outcomes of those selfsame policies. What I’ve noticed is that the policies, systems, and actors that they favor more often than not create the conditions that inadvertently facilitate the rise of policies, systems, and actors that they disfavor. This occurs because the average progressive leftist is incapable of making connections between disparate and seemingly unrelated things.

To make things more concrete: leftists support unfettered social liberalism at all costs and either (1) ignore the societal decay that this extreme liberalism leaves in its wake or (2) blames the resultant decay on “the system.” They decry all formal attempts to police the decay and malign all informal criticisms of the decay as “intolerant.”  Leftists are, at the same time, intensely anti corporation. What they never realize is that by encouraging aberrant and destructive behaviors while handicapping all effective legal and social mechanisms that would control aberrant and destructive behaviors, they create a scenario wherein the very interests they oppose (corporations) become the only entities capable of dealing with the rot that is a direct consequence of the things they support.

Take this NPR article about an anti overdose drug, for example.

Around the U.S., a worsening heroin epidemic has more and more cities turning to the anti-overdose drug naloxone to reduce deaths from abuse. Also known as Narcan, the medication blocks the effects of opioids and reverses the respiratory depression that occurs during an overdose.

The article begins by unironically stating that another drug is what’s needed to control a drug epidemic that is already raging out of control. Naturally, the Brahmins at NPR won’t bother to consider the underlying causes of this terrible epidemic; they’ll just wring their hands and wail about how horrible this all is. I’ll venture this guess though: I bet that all of the hand wringers are the same people who support comprehensive drug decriminalization, because recreational drug use doesn’t hurt anybody. Except when it hurts everybody, of course.

So what’s been happening as a result of this epidemic and what’s going on with naloxone?

Baltimore recently stepped up its naloxone training, focusing on drug users, and their families and friends. So far this year, city health workers have taught nearly 4,400 people how to use naloxone. That’s more than quadruple the number trained in 2014. A big concern for Baltimore and other cities is the price of naloxone, which has risen dramatically as demand has gone up. In February, the Baltimore City Health Department was paying about $20 a dose. By July, the price had climbed to nearly $40 a dose.

It turns out that turning a blind eye to drug use and discouraging authorities from vigorously prosecuting users and dealers has had a deleterious impact on cities around the U.S. Liberal nonjudgmentalism has a rather steep cost, it would appear. Now, rather than penalizing drug users, keeping drugs off the streets, and cracking down on scum of the earth dealers and other drug trade operatives, American city leaders must contract with a third-party, institutional drug dealer pharmaceutical company to obtain licit drugs to prevent their residents from overdosing on illicit drugs that, due to the cities’ lax drug law enforcement, has been flooding their streets.

Of course, as these cities devolve into modern-day opium dens, city governments must expand their suite of services (and raise taxes) to ensure that their residents don’t drop like flies from overdoses. As cities across the U.S. race to stockpile the drug of all drugs from the same manufacturer, the manufacturer has begun to increase the price. This price increase only reflects the increased costs of R & D and not the realities of supply and demand, of course.

Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, places the blame squarely on the manufacturers and, in particular, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, the company that makes the naloxone most widely used by health departments and police.

“When drug companies increase their prices and charge exorbitant rates, they decrease the access to the drug,” Cummings said this summer. “There’s something awfully wrong with that picture.”

Amphastar says it raised prices because of increased manufacturing costs, including a rise in the prices of raw materials, energy and labor.

“What’s wrong with [the] picture” is actually that cities are looking to a drug company to deal with the effects of their bad governance rather than improving the quality of their governance and taking active measures to deal with the fallout from their shit policies.

While naloxone has been around for decades, Amphastar has excelled in drug delivery design. No icky needles. So for the time being, Amphastar is the only game in town.

Today, Baltimore and other cities are choosing intranasal naloxone for community use — naloxone that can be sprayed into the nostril and doesn’t require needles. The intranasal delivery method isn’t explicitly approved by the FDA. Amphastar is currently the only company that makes naloxone in a dosage that can be administered that way.

Great. So what’s the obvious effect of this? Demand for naloxone is rising (over 40 states have passed laws facilitating access to naloxone) while the supply remains pretty much flat, and Amphastar has an effective monopoly, so prices rise. Of course, this places the corporation in a pretty flush bargaining position and forces city officials to go cap in hand to it. So now, this corporation can call the shots. This corporation can manipulate prices. This corporation now has a seat at the political table. The corporation has the power extract money from cities and steer cities in directions that will be beneficial to it. And stupid prog drug liberalization policies have made this possible. But never will they question the wisdom of what they have promoted. Thus have the anti corporatist pursued policies that ultimately produced corporate capture, allowing this company to gouge the nation.

Rather than discouraging and penalizing vice (because that would be judgmental and cast the first stone and f*ck the drug war man!) and allowing the “prison-industrial complex” to do the job of keeping drugs, drug dealers, and drug users off the streets (because prisons are corporations man!), leftists make possible the creation of new, equally corporatist stakeholder interests that arise in order to deal with the blowback from policies that were designed to reduce the influence of such stakeholders in the political process in the first place. I bet these corporations also support moves towards more sensible drug policy and harm reduction.

Stupid, but square one always looks like progress to the dim-witted.


Democracy as Farce

Take a gander at this voter registration form. I requested mail forwarding services, as I’m moving soon. I was prompted to update my voter information at the same time. Click to expand. Take note of the highlighted areas.

Voter Registration Form

Some observations:

  • If you have neither a state ID nor a social security number, you may still register to vote. You’ll just be assigned a “unique identifier” by the state.
  • Yet, you must promise that you’re an American citizen, because only American citizens can vote. So if you’re not a citizen, you shouldn’t submit the form. That would be fraud. But if you have no documentation proving citizenship (which would cast reasonable doubt upon your being an American citizen), the state will nonetheless provide you with a “unique identifier” enabling you to vote if you do submit the form, however fraudulently.
  • If this analysis is correct, is American citizenship any longer a requirement to vote in American elections?
  • All you need is WiFi to register to vote nowadays, but liberals always conveniently leave this out when they bemoan the disenfranchising effects of voter ID laws. While voter registration may be done at the state level and may vary, if other states have voter registration processes as lax as the one that Illinois has, how else would the states be able to verify citizenship except for requesting identification?
  • Unless of course, the aim is to obscure the question of citizenship so as to make it possible for any Tomas, Enrique, and Mohammed who seeps through our porous borders to vote, tipping the scales in favor of the Left. Which it is.
  • Corollary: what’s to stop non citizens from voting and subverting the American political process to their own ends?
  • It’s pretty clear that American citizenship is becoming increasingly meaningless.
  • When the Left tries to concern troll Americans into thinking that they’re delusional for thinking that voter registration fraud is a problem, why does everyone accept it? Sidebar: check out the name & credentials of the chick peddling the argument.
  • Donald Trump is still right.

Film Review: Kingsman: The Secret Service

I finally saw Kingsman: The Secret Service in its entirety last night. Quite a sick piece of cinema, though it’s endlessly fascinating to observe the cultural messaging that the elites try to advance through the medium of film. There are times when the veil slips, or the hand is revealed either intentionally or inadvertently. Kingsman qualifies as one of those times.


The movie begins innocently enough, with Kingsman Galahad delivering a medal of valor to his fallen comrade’s widow. Feeling guilt over the man’s death, he instructs her and her young son Eggsy to call a number written on the back of the medal and deliver a coded message should they ever need help. Years later, Eggsy, now a shiftless adult and petty criminal, dials Galahad after being arrested for car theft. Eggsy learns of the existence of Kingsman, an elite secret intelligence agency to which both Galahad and Eggsy’s father belonged. The Kingsman recently lost one of its agents (Lancelot), and Galahad becomes Eggsy’s sponsor in a competition to find a successor to fill the vacancy. Eggsy proves himself a fierce competitor, but ultimately loses out to another female competitor after balking at shooting a dog that he was charged with training as a part of his Kingsmen training.

Simultaneously, the agency has been investigating billionaire technology mogul Richmond Valentine (an Elmer Fudd-like character who is oddly squeamish about gore) in connection with the disappearances of various high ranking officials worldwide. Valentine announces his “philanthropic” plans to give everyone in the world a free SIM card, allowing access to free telecommunications on his dime forever. It’s later revealed that Valentine subscribes to what is basically deep ecology, and views humans as “viruses” and the Earth as their “host.” He believes that global warming is something akin to a “fever” that Earth is developing to cure itself of its human virus. In one noteworthy quote he states: “either the host kills the virus, or the virus kills the host; either way, the result is the same.”

The SIM cards are just a Trojan horse. Valentine plans to depopulate the Earth by transmitting a signal through the SIM cards that triggers human aggression while diminishing inhibitions, driving anyone within earshot into uncontrollable, bloodthirsty rage. The viewer is given a taste of the signal’s potential in a rather blood-soaked scene taking place in a church (discussed after the jump). Valentine has been recruiting a cabal of global elites who he sequesters in his bunker where they plan to wait out the slaughter, planning to establish a “new world” after the carnage.

Ultimately, the plan is found out, and Eggsy along with the remaining members of Kingsman defeat Valentine & his hench wench and save the day.

This film was perverse to say the least. Nonetheless, it was interesting to watch the Left reveal its inky id, as it indulges in fantasies of slaughtering racist/sexist/homophobic Christians and dabbles in doomsday global depopulation strategies, all while passing off its masturbatory desires off as entertainment. This film is a glimpse into what the far Left is all about: the denigration/destruction of Christianity, population control, global depopulation, One World, global elitism, mainstreaming of homosexual behavior, and marginally, feminism.

Kingsman reveals how hostile the Left is towards Christians and Christianity, and how willing it is to defame Christians at any opportunity. The viewer is treated to one scene in a church quite reminiscent of the Westboro Baptist Church, where a fire and brimstone preacher rails against the “fagniggerJew” menace threatening to bring damnation upon humanity. Valentine decides to use the church to test his signal, whereupon Galahad proceeds to brutally slaughter the worshippers under the shadow of the Cross. The scene’s gratuitousness cannot be understated. It did nothing to advance the plot; it was just gleeful fantasy. Implicit in the scene was that “those people deserved what they got” because they were “intolerant bigots.” The faithful who refuse to adopt the secular religion of  “tolerance” must pay for their recalcitrance with extermination.

The film also prominently features the far Left fantasy of holocaust, cleansing the world of the undesirables and leaving nothing but an oligarchical master race of elites to begin anew. In polite settings, Leftists will often discuss their concern for the “environment” and “global warming.” However, the initiated understand this to require depopulation of vast swaths of the Earth combined with human concentration in dense urban areas. Kingsman flirts with the idea of effectuating this through technology, but it’s unclear the form that this plan will eventually take. Technology is already being used to construct a massive global surveillance superstructure, so it’s entirely possible that the existing structure will be repurposed for decimation. What is clear is that the process of depopulation has already begun, as birthrates around the world have already began to plummet. The masses have already begun to internalize this radical ecological conservation message, and are beginning to view humans as a blight on the face of the Earth deserving of extinction.

The Left is absolutely obsessed with homosexuality and homosexual behavior, and will try to inject it into every aspect of the culture, even in contexts where it has no relevance. This is done to subvert. Towards the end of the film, Eggsy discovers a Swedish princess that Valentine imprisoned in his bunker after she refused to go along with his scheme. Eggsy requests a kiss from her, as he’d “always wanted to kiss a princess.” After a moment, he heads off saying: “sorry. Gotta save the world now.” The princess, who up until then spoke flawless English, says in a preposterous pidgin: “if you save world, we can do it in zee asshole.” Gratuitously scatological and crass, but the message is clear: “anal sex is normal now, preferable even. Everyone’s doing it. It’s just like any other version of sex.” Realistically, this dovetails nicely with the elites’ depopulation strategy for obvious reasons, so that this messaging is advanced isn’t too surprising.

And of course there’s the throwaway bit about the “girl having more balls than the guy” when the girl shoots her dog and wins the spot that Eggsy lost.

The elites don’t necessarily want to force you into slavery. In the best case scenario, they want you to choose a sort of soft, quasi-slavery of your own free will, where your basic needs are met at little cost or effort to you: your utilities are free, forever: so long as you unquestioningly accept their dominion over you. Everything is provided for: so long as you don’t think too deeply about whether it’s worth it to exchange liberty for a guaranteed monthly pittance from the state. Life is easy, and everyone is equal; it’s just that no one ever has very much. In the worst case scenario, you are an obstacle to “progress” and eligible for extermination or internment in a population dense urban ghetto. You are a virus to be “expelled” by the host.

Kingsman had a happy ending, but it’s likely that movies like this will feature apocalyptic endings with increasing frequency as events are escalated and accelerated towards a second Year Zero of elite design.