The NBA stands

ProFootballTalk is desperately hoping for the spread of the #TakeAKnee protest:

As the NFL is embroiled in controversy over players kneeling during the anthem, the league has steadfastly insisted that players have the right not to stand and will not be disciplined if they choose to exercise that right.

The NBA, meanwhile, has reiterated that players must stand for the anthem. NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said the league’s longstanding rule requiring players to stand for the anthem isn’t going anywhere.

“On the anthem specifically, we have a rule that requires our players to stand for the anthem. It’s been a rule as long as I’ve been involved with the league, and my expectation is that our players will continue to stand for the anthem,” Silver said.

What’s unclear is what the NBA would do if a player chooses to violate that rule. In 1996 the NBA suspended Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf for refusing to stand for the anthem. Abdul-Rauf quickly relented and stood for the anthem while saying a silent prayer. After President Trump’s comments kicked off the latest anthem controversy last week, however, two of the NBA’s biggest stars, Steph Curry and LeBron James, offered comments critical of Trump. If those two stars were to kneel in protest, it’s highly unlikely that Silver would suspend them.

So far, the NBA has managed to avoid controversy. All it takes is one player to defy Silver’s orders, and the controversy will spread to basketball.

Silver is smarter than Goodell. He’s a student of David Stern, and he’s not about to let the players take over his league.

The morality of immigration

Correcting the common confusion of Churchian dogma with actual Christian philosophy:

In looking at the debate over immigration, it is almost automatically assumed that the Church’s position is one of unconditional charity toward those who enter the nation, legally or illegally.

However, is this the case? What does the Bible say about immigration? What do Church doctors and theologians say? Above all, what does the greatest of doctors, Saint Thomas Aquinas, say about immigration? Does his opinion offer some insights to the burning issues now shaking the nation and blurring the national borders?

Immigration is a modern problem and so some might think that the medieval Saint Thomas would have no opinion about the problem. And yet, he does. One has only to look in his masterpiece, the Summa Theologica, in the first part of the second part, question 105, article 3 (I-II, Q. 105, Art. 3). There one finds his analysis based on biblical insights that can add to the national debate. They are entirely applicable to the present.

Saint Thomas: “Man’s relations with foreigners are twofold: peaceful, and hostile: and in directing both kinds of relation the Law contained suitable precepts.”

Commentary: In making this affirmation, Saint Thomas affirms that not all immigrants are equal. Every nation has the right to decide which immigrants are beneficial, that is, “peaceful,” to the common good. As a matter of self-defense, the State can reject those criminal elements, traitors, enemies and others who it deems harmful or “hostile” to its citizens.

The second thing he affirms is that the manner of dealing with immigration is determined by law in the cases of both beneficial and “hostile” immigration. The State has the right and duty to apply its law.

Saint Thomas: “For the Jews were offered three opportunities of peaceful relations with foreigners. First, when foreigners passed through their land as travelers. Secondly, when they came to dwell in their land as newcomers. And in both these respects the Law made kind provision in its precepts: for it is written (Exodus 22:21): ’Thou shalt not molest a stranger [advenam]’; and again (Exodus 22:9): ’Thou shalt not molest a stranger [peregrino].’”

Commentary: Here Saint Thomas acknowledges the fact that others will want to come to visit or even stay in the land for some time. Such foreigners deserved to be treated with charity, respect and courtesy, which is due to any human of good will. In these cases, the law can and should protect foreigners from being badly treated or molested.

Saint Thomas: “Thirdly, when any foreigners wished to be admitted entirely to their fellowship and mode of worship. With regard to these a certain order was observed. For they were not at once admitted to citizenship: just as it was law with some nations that no one was deemed a citizen except after two or three generations, as the Philosopher says (Polit. iii, 1).”

Commentary: Saint Thomas recognizes that there will be those who will want to stay and become citizens of the lands they visit. However, he sets as the first condition for acceptance a desire to integrate fully into what would today be considered the culture and life of the nation.

A second condition is that the granting of citizenship would not be immediate. The integration process takes time. People need to adapt themselves to the nation. He quotes the philosopher Aristotle as saying this process was once deemed to take two or three generations. Saint Thomas himself does not give a time frame for this integration, but he does admit that it can take a long time.

It takes at least four generations, and even that is not enough when people have a strong tribal identity that supersedes their residence du jour. Regardless, the reasoning of Thomas Aquinas is a powerful rebuke to the Churchians appealing to false teachings in the name of Christ.

Volume V is go!

Thank you, Alt★Hero backers! It looks as if we will not be needing to hold a vote on which of the first three volumes will be continued, but we will see how things proceed from here. At this point, the video producer may need to start thinking about voice

And we will hold a vote on which of the first three volumes are made into a video. Unless, of course, we have to add more stretch goals to account for more videos. To celebrate this milestone, we have added a third page to Dynamique’s story on the Alt★Hero campaign page.

“Welcome to the Global Justice Initiative.”

Milo Yiannopoulos weighs in on Alt★Hero:

It’s no secret that SJWs are ruining comics. If trends continue, they’ll make Superman into an obese disabled pansexual Muslim woman by next spring. And who wants that? Fortunately, our friends at Castalia House still remember what comics are supposed to be about: Highly attractive heroes in skin-tight outfits who beat people up for America. 

Too clever for love

This, in a nutshell, illustrates why pushing women into higher education is a waste of human talent, a net producer of human misery, and unnatural selection for a less intelligent population:

We’re just too clever to find a boyfriend! It may sound insufferably smug, but these women say their high intellect means they struggle to meet someone. Natasha Hooper, 22, says men do not know how to deal with educated women. She is worried about not finding love because of a shortage of educated men. Becca Porter, 23, says a man factory worker turned her down for being too clever. She says the sense of achievement derived from learning is alien to most men. Andrea Gould, 41, believes her intellect has prevented her from finding love. ‘I get the impression they’d rather date a girl without a degree, said Andrea.

The issue, she explains, is the calibre of men she attracts. ‘I’m not claiming to be Albert Einstein, but I can’t seem to meet a man I find intellectually stimulating,’ she says. Nor is she the only well-educated young woman who says she is too clever to find love. Indeed, she is one of a growing breed of women who fear — perhaps with good reason — they will be left on the proverbial shelf because of a shortage of educated men.

Recent figures from the university admissions service UCAS showed that 30,000 more women than men are starting degree courses in the UK. On A-level results day last month, 133,280 British women aged 18 secured a university place compared with 103,800 men of the same age. The effects of this carry over into the workplace, where women aged from 22 to 29 typically now earn £1,111 more a year than their male peers.

This is what happens when Man attempts to outwit Mother Nature. Speaking as a man who is, statistically speaking, more intelligent than 99.9 percent of the species, I can attest that I don’t particularly value female intelligence. The cognitive differences between a normal smart girl and an average girl is virtually undetectable to me, and the most noticeable difference is that the former tends to behave in a much more challenging manner, which is the real reason that men “would rather date a girl without a degree”.

It’s not about about the intelligence, the cleverness, or the credentials, but rather, the attitude that tends to come with it. Men know perfectly well how to deal with educated women: they avoid them. They do so because they want an attractive and pleasant companion, not an argumentative opponent trained by her professors to regard every conversational interaction as a formal debate.

The essential problem is that the combination of female solipsism with female hypergamy means that too many women now desire the logically impossible and the statistically improbable. Women are attracted to men who possess qualities of size, earning potential, education, and, yes, intelligence, that are superior to their own. That’s fine, but the problem is when they believe that men are attracted to the same thing.

And it’s a damn good thing we’re not, because if we were, no couple would ever pair off and get together, because if X > Y for Z, then Y !> X for Z. Mutual attraction would be logically impossible. These women, both young and not-so-young, have subscribed to a false and incoherent philosophy of romance that quite literally cannot exist and has rendered both their intelligences and their educations moot. Furthermore, as believe I was the first to point out more than a decade ago, the rising F/M ratio of women at institutions of higher learning mean that at least one-third of all college graduates cannot ever marry a man with equivalent or better academic credentials.

So, it should come as no surprise that these intelligent, educated women have found neither romance nor love, have not married, and most likely, have inadvertently removed themselves from the gene pool.

Question for the Rebel backers

So, I’m informed that my arbitrary selection of 150 Rebel figurines was rather uninformed, since apparently the minimum order number where per unit prices are sensible is 500. (Don’t ask me why I chose 150, it was 3 in the morning at the time and I don’t think I was expecting that more than a handful of people would order one anyway.)

Anyhow, being a collector of wargames, and, apparently, Ridgebacks, I don’t know what the rules of statue collecting are, but I do understand that the less of them that are out there, the more desirable they are. Hence the following questions:

  • Do any Rebel-level backers care if we increase the number of figurines produced from 150 to 500?
  • If you do care, but not that much, is there anything we can do to make it up to you? My thought was to throw in a second t-shirt with the Alt★Hero logo if you are one of the 78 backers who are signed up at the Rebel level now.
  • Is going to 500 okay if they are numbered? Again, I don’t know how these things work.

We can leave things as they are and it won’t break anything, it’s just that some pretty good-looking options require minimum 500 orders. We will be offering other figurines – right now the three most-requested are a) Spacebunny, b) Dynamique, and c) More Rebel – and they will all be done in quantities of 500.

UPDATE: All right, after hearing from a lot of you, we’ve decided to increase the limited edition quantity to more viable 490, plus the 10 for the highest level backers. The statues will be numbered according to the order backed, and, depending upon what is possible, we will try to find some way to distinguish the first 150 from the next 340.

A philosophy of defeat

Cataline Sergius‏ @ReactionaryTime
Conservatives, Jonah Goldberg, David French, and Jay Nordlinger are now on the #TakeTheKnee side of things. #ConservatismIsDead

I’ve been too busy to pay any attention to what the cuckservatives have been up to, and nothing these guys do shocks me anymore, but I am modestly surprised. It’s rather remarkable how the NRO crowd manages to put themselves on the wrong side of almost every issue these days.

Conservatism conserves nothing. A philosophy of defense is a philosophy of defeat.

Dynamique is unimpressed

Thanks to all of the 445 backers and counting. In the meantime, Disney bans smoking in all Marvel films, and presumably, comics.

Genius billionaire playboy philanthropist Tony Stark has got some pretty bad habits, like drinking too much, sleeping around, and accidentally inventing genocidal artificial intelligence. But one thing he’s never going to do is light up a cigarette, says Disney; they will “absolutely prohibit” the depiction of smoking in all Disney films with a PG-13 rating or under, including those made by Marvel, Pixar, and Lucasfilm.

Chairman and CEO Bob Iger reiterated Disney’s current policy at a shareholder meeting yesterday (March 12), noting that the only exception is when films depict real-life historical figures who were known for their tobacco habit. “For instance, we’ve been doing a movie on Abraham Lincoln, he was a smoker, and we would consider that acceptable,” he said.

This isn’t the first time the Avengers have shied away from cigarettes, of course. When Joe Quesada first stepped up as Editor in Chief of Marvel Comics in 2001, he implemented a similar ban for all the main Marvel characters — having lost a grandfather to lung cancer, he believed that depicting smoking in comics encouraged the behavior. Issues in the Marvel back catalog remained unchanged, but recently new trade collections have had their cover art altered to reflect the company’s anti-smoking policy.

Dynamique is unimpressed.She finds fascist anti-smokers to be unendurably ennui-inspiring. The only thing she hates more are flats. Stand with her and support Alt★Hero.

As promised, we’ve added a second page to Dynamique’s story. Check it out on the campaign page. Check back every day for new pages, character sketches, and quite possibly, new rewards and stretch goals.


This report of the Raiders offensive line metaphorically kneeling while on the field sounds as if it must be satire. I mean, it can’t possibly be true, right?

A new report from The Armstrong and Getty Radio Show has sent shockwaves throughout the sports world after it was revealed that members of the NFL’s Oakland Raiders may have purposefully allowed their star quarterback to get sacked multiple times after he refused to kneel during the National Anthem.

If true, this would essentially mean that an NFL football game was illegally thrown over anger that one of the teams star white players did not believe that kneeling during the nations anthem was the correct way to protest supposed racial injustice in America.

In other words, an epic level scandal.

During the anthem, virtually the entire team was seen kneeling other than the teams coaches and star quarterback Derek Carr. Unfortunately, this may have not set well with the teams offensive line as they were apparently the players who spearheaded the entire idea to kneel as a team in the first.

“This is one hell of a scandal with the NFL, could ruin the whole league,” claimed the show before detailing the fact that Carr was sacked two times in a row on the teams second drive and that the teams usually dependable center snapped the ball at the wrong time in three different instances. Extremely capable receivers also made multiple “weird” drops of passes thrown by Carr that T.V. announcers even noted at the time.

On the one hand, you think, no way. What sort of professional being paid millions of dollars would even contemplate such a stupid action. And then, you consider that the combination of low IQs and an entitlement philosophy with low short time preferences does make it possible. Still unlikely, but possible.

From the radio show forums: “One of the guards reportedly said if he wants to stand alone he can play alone. One reporter asked a team official about it and was told he would never be allowed in the locker room or any access to the team if he reported on it.”

UPDATE: An NFL sponsor is the first to pull its ads:

It’s happening; the NFL has just lost their first sponsor over players and coaches’ move to take a knee during the playing of our national anthem before kick-off.

Tennessee businessman Allen Jones slammed the league as “unpatriotic” in a public statement and pulled all ads for his two businesses, Check Into Cash and Hardwick Clothes, from the NFL for the remainder of the season. Jones reportedly “instructed his media buyer to remove any commercials from airing during NFL games.”

“Our companies will not condone unpatriotic behavior!” said Jones in a statement.

The dark side of entrepreneurial genius

Many will rightly look at this as a wonderful example of the sort of energetic immigrant entrepreneurialism that they believe to be of great benefit to America. But, as it happens, there is a very real and substantive downside to it as well:

The Uberpreneur: How An Uber Driver Makes $252,000 A Year. Uber may not just be a disruptive platform for transportation, but one for small businesses.
“Absolutely,” Uber spokeswoman Kristin Carvell says. “One of the greatest things about the Uber platform is that it offers economic opportunity for a variety of drivers — full-time, part-time, veterans, teachers, artists, and students — in more than 260 cities around the world.  Supporting and fueling the local economy is important to Uber and our driver partners help us to achieve this goal.”

His passengers seem to agree. Gavin’s ratings are 4.85/5.00 on Uber Black, 4.87/5.00 on UberX and 4.95/5.00 on Lyft, which he also uses. Those ratings have held up over time; Gavin drove over 3,829 passengers in the past 18 months.

These passengers include “executives who people pay thousands of dollars to meet at networking events,” Gavin says. He’s met Vogue fashion editors and Silicon Valley’s top brass, including legendary investor Shervin Pishevar.

“I’ve had a lot of amazing drivers, but Gavin is one of the best,” Shervin told me. “I was in his car with my daughter when I saw his jewelry designs. I thought they were wonderful and gave him a lot of encouragement to pursue his dreams.”

It’s these tactics that translate to sales. In the past year, Gavin designed many jewelry pieces for passengers, averaging $18,000 in transactions per month. Adding the $3,000 monthly gross earnings from Uber, he made $252,000 last year. Gavin used the income to expand his business, buying three more cars and hiring six new drivers.

It’s an absolutely brilliant idea. This guy is advertising far more effectively than any social media or Madison Avenue campaign, taking advantage of the direct one-on-one time he has with his riders to let them know about his business, which quite clearly is a genuine interest to a sufficient percentage of them. This guy is a bona fide entrepreneurial genius.

However, it’s not all rosy good cheer and future GDP growth on the horizon.

But Gavin’s growing business doesn’t tell the full story. As he’s become more successful, he hasn’t forgotten about his fellow Filipino immigrants. “I reach back to my roots,” he said. “When hiring new drivers, I find underemployed Filipinos and give them the jobs first. Most don’t know much about smartphones — and that’s okay. I teach them about Uber and Lyft. I teach them how to use the internet so it can help their lives in other ways, too. I let them use the cars to run errands and pick up their children. It’s not about squeezing every dollar from them. It’s about empowering the community that you came from.”

So much for American meritocracy. Gavin is so grateful for the opportunity that America has given him that he’s actively helping his fellow Filipinos in preference to Americans, even when they are massively less-qualified.

This is precisely why the civic nationalist notion of only bringing in the best and most productive foreigners is as harmful to the nation, and arguably more insidiously so, than importing a parasitical class of welfare recipients.

Alt★Hero launch

Alt★Hero is go on Freestartr. We apologize in advance for any inadvertent mass triggerings that may result from the release of this video. You’ll want to check out the campaign every day, because we will be adding a new page, as well as additional character art, on a daily basis. The video can be watched here as well.

On the production side, those of you who are Voxiversity supporters may be pleased to note that this video was produced by the Voxiversity producer. Also, for both campaigns, be sure to provide us with your emails so we can get in contact with you and provide you with the relevant information and digital products.

UPDATE Four hours. Four freaking hours! That’s how long it took to fully fund Alt★Hero by 242 backers, which is now officially green-lighted. Someone told me that it would be fully funded on the first day and I did not believe them, although the five thousand angry tweets by Comics SJWs in response to one image of Rebel did make me wonder.

So, thank you all, and rest assured that together, we will Make Comics Great Again and have a great deal of fun in the process.

We’ll figure out how to accept one-offs and additional orders over the weekend. For foreign backers, don’t worry about the US forms. Just cram everything into the US form, including your country. Freestartr will fix that, but in the meantime that will work.

Rebel wasn’t really expecting to have to get ready quite so quickly….