A serious Hugo contestant

Hey, if SJWs don’t have to read the books to rate them, we don’t have to read them to recommend them.

1 of 106 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars
I’m just going to rate this a 1/5 on principle…
By Zoe S. Galaitsis on October 6, 2015

I’m just going to rate this a 1/5 on principle, after Jim Butcher got nominated by Vox Day and his Rabid Puppies. Not sure what’s going on there but Butcher hasn’t come out and said a thing, not even to deny their platform of reviling women, gays, and non-Christians. I’m generally wary of reading anything by him or giving him any money at this point.

So the SJWs don’t like Jim Butcher now simply because he won’t submit and dutifully pronounce their ritual denunciations. This is one of the many reasons why they will always lose when resisted; they are the most untrustworthy and unreliable allies you could ever hope to have.

It seems to me that we’ll have to give serious consideration to The Cinder Spires: the Aeronaut’s Windlass. Very serious consideration.

This is my shocked face

ESPN finally gets around to shutting down Grantland:

Effective immediately we are suspending the publication of Grantland.  After careful consideration, we have decided to direct our time and energy going forward to projects that we believe will have a broader and more significant impact across our enterprise.

Grantland distinguished itself with quality writing, smart ideas, original thinking and fun.  We are grateful to those who made it so.  Bill Simmons was passionately committed to the site and proved to be an outstanding editor with a real eye for talent.  Thanks to all the other writers, editors and staff who worked very hard to create content with an identifiable sensibility and consistent intelligence and quality. We also extend our thanks to Chris Connelly who stepped in to help us maintain the site these past five months as he returns to his prior role.

There was no way the site was ever going to make money. It made sense as a means of keeping Bill Simmons happy, but there was no reason to continue it once they fired him.

I liked the idea, but it was too full of SJWs pushing the usual nonsense to bother sifting through it for the interesting articles. I quit reading it regularly long before the Sports Guy was ejected.

The necessity of reprisal

Some interesting and intelligent commentary on John Wright’s post concerning A Time for Peace, A Time for War:

HMSLion: All the codes of chivalry, of diplomacy, and Laws of War work on an assumption that all participants will adhere to them. They represent the Golden Rule in it’s most practical form.

But those codes also recognized the legitimacy of reprisals against violators. A foe who showed no mercy could expect none.

The Enemies of Civilization have realized that there are some people who are so accustomed to acting in a civilized manner that they have forgotten that reprisals are perfectly legitimate. More than legitimate, necessary. It must NEVER be possible to secure an advantage by violating the norms of civilized conduct.

And people are starting to realize it.

I’ll add something else…part of the problem of the West is that the World Wars were fought with a level of savagery that shocked us. They were the modern equivalent of the Thirty Years War three centuries earlier – a conflict fought with a ferocity unprecedented among Christian nations.

The Thirty Years War led to significant changes in international politics with the Treaty of Westphalia, and the formalization of Laws of Warfare. A system that held for nearly three centuries, even in the teeth of the Napoleonic Wars.

The World Wars? There’s been no formal New Laws of Land Warfare, but there’s been no willingness to use nuclear weapons since then. Nor to engage in area bombing of cities. But the lack of a formal document has, I think, hindered the self-confidence of the West. Too many people are obsessively wringing their hands over the past, instead of resolving not to do that sort of thing again.

dgarsys adds: It must NEVER be possible to secure an advantage by violating the norms of civilized conduct. In other words, to keep turning the other cheek in order to “be nice” and “not use their tactics” is to play the iterated prisoners dilemma in “nice only” mode, instead of hammering the violator for betraying you.

As William S. Lind has observed, 4GW is in many ways 0GW, albeit with a technological twist that is primarily based on communications. Both of Mr. Wright’s commentators are correct; the chaos is being stoked by the international community’s legal overreach combined with a practical refusal to permit bad actors to be held to account if it finds them useful to its interests.

You invited them, you deal with them

Sweden’s government is going to collapse and the other EU member states are not going to prevent it:

The Swedish Foreign Minister has claimed her country is facing collapse due to the mass influx of refugees as the migrant crisis deepens. Margot Wallstrom has said that Sweden cannot cope with taking in refugees at its current level, without it affecting services.

She says that Stockholm will now have to pressure the European Union in a bid to force other member states to share the burden of those coming from the Middle East, mainly Syria.

It is expected that Sweden will take in around 190,000 migrants by the end of 2015. In the first nine months of the year, more than 73,000 people applied for asylum in Sweden.

And Mrs Wallstrom said in an interview: ‘I think most people feel that we cannot maintain a system where perhaps 190,000 people will arrive every year – in the long run, our system will collapse. And that welcome is not going to receive popular support. I have to admit that there have been moments recently of very great disappointment. I have heard statements from member states that have been completely astonishing and very discouraging.’

The Foreign Minister’s comments come after arsonists attacked housing for asylum seekers in the small town of Munkedal, in the south of the country. No one was seriously injured, although some of the 14 migrants living there suffered slight smoke inhalation. They were swiftly rehoused.

It’s remarkable to see idiot female politicians like Merkel and Wallstrom whining and crying about the fact that no one will fix the problem that they caused. They ought to own up to the consequences of their failures and resign immediately. The other member states aren’t going to let them off the hook. The Swedes should let the Swedish Democrats deal with it. They will have a robust means of dealing with these unwelcome migrants. If it happens soon enough, they will simply repatriate them with a minimum of fuss and bother.

Otherwise, history clearly dictates that there are three alternatives. One, the invaders conquer the natives and rule over them. Two, the invaders excise territory from the natives and establish a new country; Israel and Bosnia-Herzogovina being two such examples. Three, the natives kill all the invaders.

The pipe dreams of the multicultis notwithstanding, peaceful integration is not a credible scenario.

I’ve been editing the excellent essay on migration that Martin van Creveld wrote, originally for Riding the Red Horse Vol. 2, and it is very clear that, statistically speaking, the world is overdue for another of its periodic ethnic cleansings. Assuming it happens in the next five years, the next European one won’t even be particularly large by continental standards.

The war in Norway

It isn’t over. It has barely begun.

Three African immigrants who brutally raped a 14-year-old girl to the point where she wanted to kill herself were given extremely light sentences by a court in Norway, with one receiving community service and avoiding prison altogether.

The incident happened on the night of July 30 when the three men accosted the girl on a commuter train before also molesting her in a farm house and at an apartment in Oslo.

During her ordeal, the girl was raped both orally and anally before being forced to take drugs. According to reports, the abuse, which lasted for hours, was so horrific that at one point the girl expressed a desire to take her own life to end the suffering.

The girl suffered “severe mental damage” and PTSD as a result of the incident, missed a year of school and is still struggling to deal with what happened.

The three men, 18-year-old Bile Mohamed Elmi, 21-year-old Abdirizak Nur Ali and 21-year-old Mohamed Abdirisak Mohamed, were initially charged with gang rape, which carries a maximum sentence of 21 years.

However, prosecutor Cecilie Schloss Møller insisted there wasn’t enough evidence and the three men were convicted of sexual contact with a child under 16 years of age, which carries a lighter sentence.

I always figured they’d put up statues to the guy one day, but at this rate, they’ll be letting him out of prison and turning over the military to him before long. He looks less and less crazy every passing day.


It’s funny how even though it repeatedly backfires on them, they keep trying and trying and trying, not only using the same tactic, but relying on exactly the same quote. Because, as you surely know, anyone who dares to make a factual observation is raciss. Ergo, disqualified!

When I point out that he was intentionally baiting a person of color with a term that has racial overtones, his answer sounds positively gleeful. “I’m calling her a half-savage because I know it’s going to offend the crap out of her,” Beale says. “She’s going to run around screaming ‘Racist! Racist!’ for the next 10 years.” A beat, and then he adds: “I don’t consider all black people to be half-savages. I mean, some people are. Here in Europe, for example, we have actual proper Africans, not African-Americans. This leads to problems, like people shitting on top of the closed toilets. They don’t know how to use indoor plumbing, OK? This is not civilized behavior.”

She seems to seriously believe I was making that up or something. Not so much.

Fed up with having to clean up messes in the public toilets, a Swiss railway company has come up with a series of graphic illustrations for visitors from Asia and the Middle East to instruct them how to sit on a toilet seat.

The pictograms, that have appeared on trains in the popular tourist destination of Mount Rigi in the Swiss Alps, instruct users to sit on toilet seats rather than to squat on them and to discard used toilet paper in the lavatory and not in the waste bin.

“It happens that guests mount the toilet seats to do their business – and sometimes they don’t know where to put the toilet paper,” said Roger Joss, director of marketing for the Mount Rigi railway at Lake Lucerne in central Switzerland.

The Swiss tourist board has also accused foreign tourists of defecating in the shower…. In March last year, Lloyds Bank’s Old Broad Street office in central
London also put up instructions telling foreign staff how to use the
loo, with details such as ‘sit on the toilet – do not stand on it’, and
‘please flush it with your hand and not your foot’.

Those of us who aren’t parochial Americans who have apparently never traveled outside their little white enclaves know that many immigrants really don’t abide by civilized standards. I have not only seen the above signs as well as the occasional shit left on the toilet seat, I once watched a pair of Africans spend 7 minutes carefully studying a roundabout before getting back in the car and going the wrong way, very nearly causing a head-on collision as they took out the floral arrangement in the center.

This is something we are supposed to believe is a good thing? A sustainable thing? A progressive thing? A desirable thing? How is the West going to help the rest of the world in the future if it becomes the rest of the world? Do SJWs just really enjoy train stations and restaurants that smell like shit?

As for Jemisin, I note that she is still doing exactly what I expected her to do. It’s already been, what, two years? It’s not my fault she’s an easily predictable half-savage, any more than it is my fault that the, shall we say, differently civilized find it difficult to master indoor plumbing and roundabouts.

It burns! It burns!

SJWs are very, very unhappy about the fact that people are being exposed to SJWs ALWAYS LIE:

ByNome D. Gerron October 29, 2015
0 of 1 people found this review helpful

this is a scree of vindictiveness and self promotion. Somehow, probably in a manner akin to the almost success in awarding himself a people’s s/f trophy, this time waster appears in too many (and too many completely unrelated) categories of kindle recommendations. for example, just today, this book was pimped to me three times: in Moro history, in adaptionics and in economics. Motivated by apparent personal animosity, this book is gaming kindle.

There is is. Third law of SJW: SJWs Always Project.

It is interesting, though. We know for a fact that there are SJWs inside Amazon; it is another asymmetric battlefield where the rules are interpreted against us. But perhaps it is not quite as entirely enemy-controlled ground as we assumed.

But since this fake review is an open attempt at gaming Amazon, you know what to do.

Exposing the true face of SJW

Rosarior beats back and exposes an SJW entryist attempting to impose a Code of Conduct on the Awesome-Django project:

great project!! I have one observation and a suggestion. I noticed you have rejected some pull requests to add some good django libraries and that the people submitting those pull requests are POCs (People of Colour). As a suggestion I recommend adopting the Contributor Code of Conduct (http://contributor-covenant.org) to ensure everybody’s contributions are accepted regarless of their sex, sexual orientation, skin color, religion, height, place of origin, etc, etc, etc. As a white straight male and lead of this trending repository, your adoption of this Code of Conduct will send a loud and clear message that inclusion is a primary objective of the Django community and of the software development community in general. D.

A few things about this. First, the name is generic. Second, this comment is literally the SJW’s first “contribution to the project. Third, while the SJW uses the correct terminology, he offers no evidence whatsoever for his claims. Fourth, his claim that the people whose pull requests were rejected are People of Colour are likely false considering that he doesn’t know that the individual he is addressing is Hispanic, not white.

Fortunately, rosarior recognizes the nature of the stealth attack. While he politely addresses the nominal suggestions, he makes it clear that this project is not a soft target and shuts down the SJW’s line of entry

The pull request was rejected not the person. Of the people who did not had their patches accepted at least one submitted another pull request and was accepted or are contributors in my other repositories, disproving your basic premise.

There is no need for a code of conduct, there hasn’t been a conduct related incident with the repository and nothing about a contributor comes into play when rejecting or accepting a patch (as proved above). An explanation is provided when a patch is rejected, and some have been left open to re-asses in a future time.

I’m not white and please don’t make any other assumptions about me, they hold no relevance to the matter at hand.

I already work on several projects that hold inclusion as one of their primary goals.

I’m closing this issue based on the explanations given.

The wording allows just a little more wiggle room than is ideal, but it is a strong and effective response, particularly the implicit statement that “inclusion” is not a primary goal of this particular project. Perhaps due to the wiggle room, the SJW tries again.

You seem to have taken personal issue with well the issue 🙂 I opened
this issue not to attack you or your decisions,but to help improve a
part of the project in which it seemed lacking. Most projects on Github
have adopted the Contributor Covenant or a variant of it. It is a
very straight forward document that protects all parties,I don’t
understand your negative attitude towards that philosophy. You may not
be “white” [ in your profile picture you sure seem white 🙂 ] but you
are not a woman or a trans-gendered person so you can’t possibly
understand what they go through (harassment,exclusion,threats) and why a
code of conduct is necessary. Even the Django Software Foundation has
adopted one to protect it’s future,for me it’s very obvious Django
related projects would naturally follow suite and adopt the same if not
similar Code of Conducts. I urge you to reconsider for the good and
future of this project 🙂 Thank you

Now the rhetorical gloves come off. The SJW tries to play on rosarior’s insecurities and emotions, then throws out an appeal to the herd animal instinct before issuing an implicit threat. The code of conduct is now declared “necessary” in order to protect the future of the project, which is twice mentioned in a threatening manner. Notice that the SJW doesn’t even address the fact that his original claimed concerns were addressed, thereby negating any need for the requested code, he simply moves the goalposts and moves on to more high-pressure rhetorical tactics. This is why dialectical arguments are totally useless; the SJWs simply ignore the effective ones.

1- You opened an issue to raise concern about the relationship of a contributor’s race and the rejection of their patches.
2- Only I can accept or reject patches in this repository.
You made it clear who this was about.
Apart from this issue, we’ve had no conduct problems, so no need for a code of conduct.
I’m very certain of my race: I’m Latino, Puertorican, a Mestizo from a
Castiza mother and a Mulato father. There are many more races than just
black and white (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscegenation).
Yes, I’m not a woman or a transgendered individual and I don’t intend
to even try to understand what they have to put up with, never said
that. But you assume women and transgendered individual are the only
targets of harassment, exclusion and threats.

English is not my first language and I hope I’m mistaken but your last line “I urge you to reconsider for the good and future of this project 🙂 ” sounded like a threat, please clarify.

This response could be described as overly long and dialectical; rhetoric has ZERO informational content so responding to the feigned issues serves no purpose unless one is doing it to expose pseudo-dialectic on behalf of any onlookers. However, expecting a programmer to not respond in a systematic manner to the issues raised is rather like expecting sight hounds not to chase running rabbits, so it’s harmless. What is particularly important, however, is the way rosarior calls out the SJW for his implicit threats and requests clarification; in doing so he causes the SJW to unmask completely and show his fangs.

I really have no idea why you are responding the way you are! Really!! Code of Conducts are not JUST about conduct,they cover all the spectrum of behaviours expected from civilized human beings that are more and more absend in the software industry. You are evading the topic at hand and I can only wonder why,why deny equal opportunity for all to join and contribute to your project Roberto?

That you have not “seen” harassment doesn’t mean it is not happening all around us. And turning a blind eye makes it worst. I was not threaning you,but your reaction is a projection of your feelings and now I feel threated by you. Reading the links you posted I only have one thing to say to you:reevaluate your actions,you are becoming a toxic individual who is harming the Python and Django communities and haven’t even realized it yet. You are a member of the Django Software Foundation and are supposed to be setting the example. I will be forwarding the content of this issue to the Chair to evaluate your continued presence in the DSF. best regards.

It’s all there. Threats, point-and-shriek, playing the victim, false accusations, and the inevitable appeal to the amenable authority. In the interest of Social Justice Convergence, the SJW demonstrates that he will try to destroy the project rather than permit it to continue if it cannot be captured and forcibly submitted to the SJW Narrative. Rosarior’s response was the best one I have seen in technology yet, as he not only defeated the assault, but exposed the SJW for what he is in the process.

This is not a joke. These people are genuinely dangerous and will destroy everything they touch. Resist them. Expose them. Seek them out in your own organizations, hunt them down and root them out. SJW delenda est.

It’s time to go on the offensive. If your group or organization has a Code of Conduct, start the campaign to get rid of it now. There is a reason the SJWs are so intent on imposing them everywhere; that is how they intend to institute their thought policing.

And since you know the SJWs are going to be coming after him, show the man he’s got support behind him. If you’re on Twitter, follow the man.

“Those who can code do, those who can’t write code of conducts.”
– Roberto Rosario

The anti-nationalist enemy

Even the mainstream Right is beginning to recognize that things have irretrievably changed and there is no going back to a sane and reasonably unified America:

A globalized faux cosmopolitanism — simultaneously tribalist and anti-national — seems to have taken much greater hold in the current administration (and perhaps even among some of its supposed political opponents). Yet the Left’s allegiance to the comfortable pieties of the Sixties seems part of the reason for its many failures.

This worldview sees a rural good ol’ boy clinging to his guns and his religion as the greatest foe of “progress.” Thus, it is woefully unprepared to confront the reality of black-robed fanatics beheading religious minorities, enslaving villages, and setting fire to the Middle East. Because of its limited moral imagination, it also struggles to persuade a heterogeneous body politic. Early proponents of Great Society welfare policies might not have foreseen how, too often, well-intentioned government dictates could destroy communities, tear apart families, and destroy the foundation of economic opportunity. Experience has — or should have — disabused us of this naïveté. And say what you will about the dangers of central planning, the technocrats of the past were at least able to do things like put a man on the Moon. The mandarins of today struggle to get a health-care website up and running. Outside the narrowly political realm, as the Far Left claims a resurgent voice in cultural affairs, we have increasingly seen how radical progressive politics are a cultural dead end: Rather than a spirit of creativity, exploration, and accomplishment, radical leftism gives us only the petty tyranny of a Maoist struggle session.

The fact that the globalist Left fails to understand its enemy is a feature, not a bug. We know them. They don’t know us. That means we will win, but only if we show up everywhere they are and refuse to continue to concede any ground, intellectual or otherwise.

That means NOT adopting their social justice ideals or their rhetoric. And that may be the hardest thing for many of us, conditioned as we are to avoid speaking our true thoughts and expressing our true feelings out of a misguided sense of imposed decency.

For the love of all that is good, and holy, and true, if we lose, we lose, but let us at least not lose due to a foolish sense of etiquette.

The Republican Final Four Three

According to the Weekly Standard, anyhow:

Tonight’s debate showed that the GOP field is smaller than it looks. Technically, there are still fourteen people running, but the winnowing is far along. We probably have a final six and possibly a final four.

The three winners of the night were pretty obvious: Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and Donald Trump.

Rubio ended Jeb Bush’s campaign with the kind of body shot that buckles your knees. That’s on Bush, who never should have come after Rubio in that spot for a host of strategic and tactical reasons. But what should scare Hillary Clinton is how effortless Rubio is even with throwaway lines, like “I’m against anything that’s bad for my mother.” Most people have no idea how fearsome raw political talent can be. Clinton does know because she’s seen it up close. She sleeps next to it for a contractually-obligated 18 nights per year.

Cruz was tough and canny—no surprise there. He went the full-Gingrich in his assault on CNBC’s ridiculous moderators. He did a better job explaining Social Security reform than Chris Christie, even (which is no mean feat). And managed to look downright personable compared with John Harwood, whose incompetence was matched only by his unpleasantness. If you’re a conservative voter looking for someone who is going to fight for your values, Cruz must have looked awfully attractive.

Then there was Trump. Over the last few weeks, Trump has gotten better on the stump. Well, don’t look now, but he’s getting better at debates, too. Trump was reasonably disciplined. He kept his agro to a medium-high level. And his situational awareness is getting keener, too. Note how he backed John Kasich into such a bad corner on Lehmann Brothers that he protested, “I was a banker, and I was proud of it!” When that’s your answer, you’ve lost the exchange. Even at a Republican debate.

And Trump had a hammer close: “Our country doesn’t win anymore. We used to win. We don’t anymore.” I remain convinced that this line (along with his hardliner on immigration) is the core of Trump’s appeal. But he didn’t just restate this theme in his closing argument. He used it to: (1) beat up CNBC; and (2) argue that his man-handling of these media twits is an example of what he’ll do as president. It was brilliant political theater.

Those were your winners.

Carson is irrelevant. He’s just the usual Republican Maybe-This-Will-Get-Me-Out-Of-Racism-Free card, the role previously played by Alan Keyes and Hermann Cain. He’s also anti-gun, so he’s a non-starter.

Cruz and Rubio are competing for the same Establishment dollar as well as the Unicorn vote, also known as the Hispanic Natural Republican. Cruz is tougher than Rubio and he also looks less like an overweight frat brother, so I think he knocks Rubio aside without too much trouble.

The real question is Establishment vs Grass Roots rebellion. And there, the verdict is far from in. And not that anyone here didn’t doubt that Jeb Bush was already cooked, but his epic fail raises some genuine questions about the idea that he is the smarter brother.

It’s hard to see how Jeb Bush recovers from his self-inflected wound at Wednesday’s CNBC Republican debate in Boulder when he went after Marco Rubio just after the young senator had hit one out of the park.  Rubio was defending himself from an editorial in the Sun Sentinel calling on Marco to stop “ripping off” the public and quit the Senate because of his poor attendance record.  Rubio responded that John Kerry and Barack Obama had been even more truant from the Senate while running for president and the paper had not only ignored that, but given these men their endorsement.  It was an example of  liberal media bias at its most obvious.  The crowd erupted in its first ovation of the night.  Advantage Rubio.

Clueless, Bush jumped in as if nothing had happened, taking the paper’s side and schoolmarmishly doubling down on Marco.  He got his head handed to him by Rubio (politely) and the audience.

Bush should just quit now. He’s an embarrassment.