G.L.Piggy [at] gmail.com
Recent Comments
- D on Trayvon Martin wanted a gun
- Lara on Charmless American Men
- FWG on Charmless American Men
- Jack Hanson on Charmless American Men
- syon on Camille Paglia flogs the academy
- Fiddlesticks on Charmless American Men
GLP Approved
- Captain Capitalism
- Dalrock
- Dennis Mangan
- Econ Log
- Elusive Wapiti
- Foseti
- Hawaiian Libertarian
- HBD Bibliography
- Heartiste
- Lion of the Blogosphere
- Marginal Revolution
- Matt Forney
- Randall Parker
- Razib Khan
- Reihan Salam
- Roosh V
- Simon Grey
- SOBL
- Steve Sailer
- The Last Psychiatrist
- The Spearhead
- Thrasymachus
- Ulysses
- Vox Day
Tweet Tweet
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
I’m sure crime in NYC is far worse than people are led to believe.
Far worse. And I’m sure there’s a racial component.
They fudge statistics of white pedophilia.
So you are saying people lie, and people in power lie more. Hmmm.
Gorb–
There’s a huge racial component to violent crime in NY. It’s virtually all committed by blacks or Hispanics. What is committed by whites is probably mostly by the mafia.
The city is one hell of a lot safer than it was in the 70′s and before though. Manhattan south of 92nd street and the good parts of Brooklyn (Brooklyn Heights, Dunbo, the white, hipster parts of Williamsberg, and most of Park Slope just feel (and are) pretty safe.
thank goodness Obstinance Works is here. just as i was thinking “you know what, we could use one more faggot troll”. he thinks that i think that this post or this topic is the most original thing ever.
Yeah… I don’t get the ”I”m come here to tell you all that I HAVE seen it all before” types? So you’ve seen it all before, old nasty fart. So what? You haven’t seen ”it” this radical unless you’re going to tell us that ”liberationism” is a myth? Yet, it doesn’t seem as though you did anything about ”it” when you witnessed ”it” then. But now, you seem intent on whining about how WE can ALL internet about ”it” and still you do nothing to thwart radical liberationism. You’re whole spiel as a ”I’ve seen ”it” all before” type gives evidence to your own attempt at radical autonomy.
This really seems like nothing more than some base, primal instinct to conflict/compete with whomever one perceives as more popular/higher/greater than themselves? A real anti-Supremacist when you get down to it. A radical liberal. A bonafide radical autonomist.
Hold on now, thordaddy.
Most of the people here have been here for awhile. They are regulars. Probably they read Auster, SBPDL, lewrockwell, maybe amren. Anyone who has done that for more than 6 months knows certain things.
When you teach kids in school, you don’t spend 20 years going over the same material. Eventually, you go beyond counting to 10, addition and subtraction.
Cities cook numbers to get federal grants – check. Negro/Mexican crime – check. The sky is blue – check.
You’ve got to go beyond the basics, the obvious and offer value. Here there is no overarching theme. If it were my site, I might speculate how this could be used to profit WN. Let’s talk about rolling the dice and making something useful of this information – that’s what OW is talking about.
Ryu,
“if it were my site”. that’s the operative phrase. i don’t come to your house and tell you what to do. it’s only because we are separated by wires and screens that you do it here.
Even if the stats aren’t fudged they can just list all of the Mestizo offenders as “white”.
I’ve often wondered how much of the much touted reductions in crime rates over the past couple of decades is a result of lying with statistics (or just plain lying). I don’t see much in the way of positive structural changes in our society that would reduce crime rates, aside from perhaps having more videogames and porn to occupy the time of kids that would normally be out doing shit and learning to be criminals.
Reym–
The most often posited four big changes are: 1) much higher rates of incarceration with long sentences beginning in the early 90s or a little before; 2) much lower rates of crack addiction than during the 80′s, as word got out by the 90′s about how devestating crack addiction quickly was, and how incredibly quickly most “samplers” get addicted after a few times using; 3) greatly increased rates of abortion among lower class black women in the 90s on I think; and 4) less incentive for the lowest level black single moms to have lots of kids due to limited term welfare, and welfare to work, reform in 1994, so Clinton mostly taking up a Gingrich/Republican set of reform proposals, stood a good chance of getting elected.
Ryu,
This same process applies to you. But no one gets to really regulate your rate of progression. Mr. Rudd is still fundamentally a liberal doing and saying illiberal things. This is good. This is progress in and of itself. A liberal seeking to restrain himself and be less liberal than he was before is good.
Now, since you have learned the basics, where do you go? You are a white nationalist, but not a white Supremacist? So, you aren’t even leading in the places you know best? You are not a leader of white nationalism because such leaders would obviously be white Supremacists?
So what are you and where are progressing to?
There is no reduction in crime. There is only what you get when you “liberate” the definition of crime to the whim of the criminal.
Even evolutionary theory teaches us that the result of “diversifying” any environment is a deleterious domino-effect across the board. Even those who feast on others self-annihilate from the gluttony of their dominance.
Crime is everywhere and can’t possibly be receding in a radically “liberating” environment.
Thordaddy—
To call Chuck a liberal is quite absurd within the current American spectrum. First of all he’s a race and gender realist, which American leftist/liberals definitely and emphatically are not. They lie to others and even to themselves through their teeth on these issues in a very real approximation of the novel 1984.
He of course can best speak for himself if he feels like it but I’m just giving my impressions from having read him blogging and sometimes commenting elsewhere for several years now.
Is he a liberal compared to the most far right white nationalists or white supremacists, well yeah he’s to somewhat to the left of that.
My take is that he’s pretty close to Steve Sailer. That is we citizens do all need to try to get along, because we’re stuck with each other, massive genocide not being an acceptable alternative, nor would be massive forced ethnic cleansing. That doesn’t mean Section 8 housing shouldn’t be ended and other hyper forced integrationist schemes stopped and reversed, and I suspect he feels the same way I do on that.
I will say one thing. I think CR may be a bit weak on advocating for white interests as an ethnic white pressure thing. THAT side of white nationalism I can mostly get behind. Mostly. But forced physical ethnic cleansing, no. I’m also opposed to forced physical racial integration. Sure no governmental segregation. But no forced private integration. Well maybe in businesses but not in residences. Yeah I’d repeal most or all (don’t know it well enough to distinguish) of the 1965 Fair Housing Act, which mandated private residential desegregation. People should be able to choose whom they want to live amongst, even if they can’t price almost all blacks out of their neighborhoods. I say this as someone who can do that, as a matter of principle.
BTW, a large but certainly not entirely, the problem with blacks e.g. being a large population in a public school whites might have to go to if they can’t afford private, or a pricy almost all white and an Asian neighborhood with few NAMs, is the permissions and privileges given them by left wing whites. Little strict disciple in classrooms, all of which must be racially proportionate despite the disruption and sometimes violence being highly racially disproportionate in the direction of blacks particularly. Lots of anti tracking pressures, because that would reveal that blacks can’t get into the highest tracts in significant numbers. Lots of dumbing down the curriculum to try, unsuccessfully, to leave not dumb and anti acting white (acting studious and self disciplined) black left behind.
Just totally culturally dysfunctional, in addition to the genetic differences.
There are other good parts of Brooklyn too, I’m just not that familiar with them. Always they’re by far mostly white or maybe also have some Asians. I’d recognize the names but can’t recall them with any certainty.
There are some good parts of Queens too. Astoria is ok, lots of Greeks and other white “ethnics”. Good place to go for fairly inexpensive but very good Greek seafood and other restaurant items. Forest Hills (US Open) is upper middle class, now apparently mostly Asian, used to be mostly Jewish. Mostly Queens is white working class and middle middle ethnic white, though Jamaica is black, and I’m sure other areas are too.
Staten Island is mostly white ethnic, mostly Italian, working and middle class, with I’d imagine a few upper middle of that ethnicity there. Not entirely Italian though. Not many blacks. Not very friendly to blacks.
One of the signs of a good area to live in is when your county cops are by and large young white men.
doug1111,
Mr. Rudd is a liberationist by virtue of his atheism. He literally believes that he can exist outside the Created Order without consequence. The irony is that this belief is shared by most WNs and absolutely rejected by the genuine white Supremacist. So Mr. Rudd and the WNs are FUNDAMENTALLY equal in their foundational beliefs while we couldn’t actually find a genuine white Supremacist amongst the ranks of White Nationalism.
*Chuck
Sorry. Completely typo.
Thordaddy–
You communicate nothing.
doug1111,
You’re a liberal, too, by virtue of your belief in a mother’s “fundamental right” to kill her child in utero. What your race-realism amounts to is simply being indifferent to charges of “racism.” That’s boring and so yesterday.
doug1111,
You can’t possibly think you’re going to quell these racial tensions with science, technology and your copious volumes of statistics, can you?
doug1111,
How is it that these atheists who are cool with abortion and real limp-wristed on homosexuality can call themselves “alt-right?” What does alt-right mean other than liberal white male that hasn’t completely SELF-annihilated?
I suspect that fudging has increased since 2000. If you examine the graphs in this post:
http://chariotofreaction.blogspot.com/2012/05/homicide-narrative-revised-to.html
You’ll see that the lethality of aggravated assault appears to have stopped improving (i.e., becoming less lethal) sometime around 2000. Since the anecdotal evidence is that trauma medicine is still improving, it’s likely that someone has been fudging the denominator moreso than in the past (homicide IS still very consistently reported and lethality is homicides/aggravated assaults including homicides).
Pingback: Fudged Crime Stats « Gucci Little Piggy · Crime Scene Technician
thordaddy–
What alt.right means is not religious right or neocon right, or paleocon right, which merges somewhat with religious right. It means scientific right. Race and gender realism right, based on the science. It means evolution actually understanding at an at least fairly deep level and believing right. It means the insight of human bio diversity being the biological reality. It means understanding overlapping bell curves for two different races on a particular trait like IQ, or aggressiveness.
I’m alt.right, glad that women have abortion rights (though think men should be able to abort both their rights and responsibilities of parenthood by giving timely notice to a woman still able to choose abortion – or giving the kid up for adoption), and not much bothered by homosexuality, though dislike cultural celebration of it. I’m quite sure that Heartiste/Roissy thinks the same way. Know he does about abortion, and scientifically based gender and race realism.
doug1111,
The problem is that very few of us need science to be race and gender realists. So you’re really late to the party.
But the question goes back to whether Mr. Rudd is a liberal or “alt-righter” and whether there is actually any fundamental difference?
I’m not sure exactly how you have differentiated yourself from the liberal’s fundamental belief system even if you happen to call yourself an “alt-righter?”
Belief in abortion thus evidencing a self-annihilating tendency. Check.
Indifferent and/or welcoming to the self-annihilating “nature” of homosexuality. Check.
Beholden to a mechanized “way of life.” Check.
And certainly not a “white” Supremacist. Check.
How are you not a liberal… Because you tangle with “black” liberationists?
Thordaday–
Oh piss off, who cares about what your micro localized self thinks
Follow up.
doug1111
I was expecting something more along the lines of a statistical rebuttal? Or maybe something more “scientific?”
You’re like the avowed homosexual who insists that he really is a man.
You know what’s funny, doug1111? You load up over at Abagond’s and you lay out impressive history lessons backed with figures and statistics AND IT MEANS NOTHING to those “people of color.”
You are a “racist” in their eyes. You are a “white supremacist” in their eyes.
And yet, you are ABSOLUTELY NOT a white Supremacist.
You, like Mr. Rudd, are the very antithesis of the white Supremacist.
You are a white male liberal. But to other more radical liberals, you are a “white supremacist” for self-evident reasons.
So what explains the mass delusion at Abagond’s concerning your supposed “white supremacy?”
What do you call those individuals over there? Do you call them “black supremacists?”
Actually, they are radical “black” liberationists. Their most cherished belief and desire is the liberation from “white supremacy” BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
But this belief and desire IS the same fundamental belief and desire of the white male liberationist. He also seeks to escape “white Supremacy.” He is only justified by a different set of motivations.
You call yourself alt-right, but you are still a white male liberal. The coalition of color seeks to minimize your freedom and so they call you “racist.” You think choosing indifference to THEIR FEARFUL RECOGNITION negates the fear, hatred and loathing that the coalition of color has for the “white supremacist.”
So doug1111…
You are not a white Supremacist. But to the people who would like to put your head on a stick… You are a “white supremacist.”
So what are you going to do? Dazzle them with science and technology?
I agree with thordaddy that religion is the answer. Religion can reverse all double standards of Cultural “Marxism”
Pingback: Linkage Is Good For You.6-24-12 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen