A Department of Homeland Security employee prepares for the future (via):

The Black Race has made many mistakes throughout the course of history – the greatest mistakes involving our interactions with white folks. We have allowed them to integrate into our societies and destroy almost every powerful Afrikan empire in history. Even today, we foolishly trust this sadistic race of devils who only seek to exterminate us from this planet. In our passionate love for the white race (our historical archenemy) we are desperately naïve and suicidal.  We love the very race that murders our babies, destroys our culture, and commits countless acts of genocide against our people worldwide.

The mistakes and poor decisions regarding integrating with whites are numerous and obvious to the informed, intellectually courageous Afrikan who respects and acknowledges truth.  Integration with whites has literally enslaved and/or killed Afrikan people in every corner of this planet where we exist. As a result of this reality and mounting white racial military momentum, a Black vs. white Race War is inevitable. The 21^st century will either mark the return of Black resistance to white domination or global white-on-Black genocide leading to our complete extinction. Warfare is eminent [sic], and in order for Black people to survive the 21^st century, we are going to have to kill a lot of whites – more than our christian hearts can possibly count.

(There might be a slight kerfuffle about this site, so I’d catch it while you can. If anything, it goes even further off the deep end as it proceeds, but it’s sane enough for government work.)

What’s the Chinese obsession with numbers all about?

Second-stage Greer-probing at Urban Future.

Tangentially related — Greer asks: Why don’t astronomical observatories sell horoscopes? (It’s his distinctive version of prog. trolling).

Who could have guessed?

(More here.)

In an intriguing post on migration and ‘expressive voting’ in Alsace-Lorraine  after the 1871 annexation, Bryan Caplan notes that although “over 90% of the new citizens of the Second Reich voted for … anti-Prussian regional parties” only 5% decided to emigrate back to France. Clearly in this case, migration patterns revealed genuine commitments — based perhaps on economic opportunity — while elections were merely an occasion to express ethnic emotionalism without consequence. As usual in human affairs, microeconomics was aligned with approximate reason, whilst politics was possessed by destructive irrationality, redeemed only by its impotence.

It’s hard to imagine what Caplan is seeing as the politically-correct take-away from this example. What it demonstrates starkly is that even populations characterized by scrupulous rationality in their private economic affairs will exploit electoral opportunities to vote for insanity — as judged by their own revealed preferences. Expect even model immigrant workers to expend their votes signalling an adherence to ethnic zealotry and ruinous economic populism — and in particular, the reproduction of exactly those social pathologies they have migrated away from. Like the French in post-1871 Alsace-Lorraine, they’ll probably vote as if they want to live somewhere they manifestly don’t want to be. (But that’s not supposed to be the message, is it?)

A glimpse into the anarcho-capitalism of the dark web:

Despite his caution, [Dread Pirate] Roberts’ personal security remains an open question. But the potential lifetime in prison he might face if identified hasn’t slowed down his growing illegal empire. “We are like a little seed in a big jungle that has just broken the surface of the forest floor,” he wrote in one speech posted to the site’s forums last year. “It’s a big scary jungle with lots of dangerous creatures, each honed by evolution to survive in the hostile environment known as human society. But the environment is rapidly changing, and the jungle has never seen a species quite like the Silk Road.”

(via)

Sailer’s review of Blomkamp’s Elysium is indeed a “self-recommending” masterpiece, and not just for this:

The notion that art is about equality and niceness is just a cover story put out by artists to keep us poor schlumps from realizing what they are up to. Art, from the Great Pyramid on down, is actually about the most talented and/or self-confident bullying the rest of us into furnishing them with the resources to realize their visions, while the nice liberal dweebs pass on to us the artists’ self-serving justifications.

[There’s even a jolt of Kurtz to keep the horror flowing]

Adam Garfinkle:

Might doesn’t necessarily make right — that’s not at all how Islamic jurisprudence on such matters reads — but it’s good enough for government work …

The idea that political seriousness can be evacuated from any situation by invoking (purely procedural) ‘democratic’ norms was always an evasion. It was a way to avoid the reality of ‘who-whom’, and thus dependent upon a haze of Cathedralist insincerity. The implicit selling point — “Don’t worry, the rabble will accept representatives that we can work with” — isn’t bought by anybody anymore. Things have gone wrong badly enough, often enough, for such promises to have been discounted down to zero.

If you don’t want the rabble in power, you have to keep them from power. That’s the simple, and now overt, understanding of the dawning post-demotic age. Michael Hirsh doesn’t like it at all:

As the Egyptian military consolidates control by murdering pro-Muslim Brotherhood protesters and declaring a state of emergency, we may be witnessing the most dangerous potential for Arab radicalization since the two Palestinian intifadas. Despite the resignation Wednesday of Mohamed ElBaradei, the vice president, in opposition to the Egyptian junta’s action, the discomfiting fact is that most of Egypt’s liberal “democrats”—along with the United States—have never looked more hypocritical. If the bloody crackdown is allowed to continue while the U.S. and West do nothing, the actions of the Egyptian military could de-legitimize democratic change in the Arab world for a generation or more.

Read without judgement, Hirsh’s article is a fascinating document, punctuated by a raging despair that marks a transition of aeons. “Egypt’s liberal ‘democrats'” can either change course in accordance with their name (as Hirsh would like, but does not expect), or they can teach the world that ‘liberal democrats’ know nothing of global political reality, and need to call themselves something new. A sound name would describe a plausible, though ambitious, aspiration: Modernity in Power (freed of democratic dreams). It will still be a while before we hear anything of this kind, but its intimations are not — any longer — difficult to detect.

ADDED: Crossing the Rubicon: “While we Americans are babbling about a new politics of ‘inclusiveness’, even some of the Twitter-Facebook liberals of Tahrir Square are coming to see Egypt as it is. Us or them.”

John Lloyd on the other (and bigger) ‘no borders’ movement — the pink wedge:

Not so long ago how a country’s administration handled its ‘homosexual problem’ would be thought of as its business. Many still think that way. But most Western democracies don’t. They haven’t just adopted legislation that enjoins equality of treatment for all, irrespective of sexuality. They have taken seriously, for the most part, the claims made by gay organizations for many years: that discrimination against gay men and women is an affront to civil liberties, and that when some states pursue discriminatory policies, those who do not should make their disapproval clear. Gay rights are now part of the world’s clash of cultures.

Is Political Correctness emerging as an even more significant factor in international relations than it is in domestic cultural reconstruction?

ADDED: Jim Goad comments