Category: behold the female

More on Theranos

An example of the “wimmin” that post-wall harridan Melinda wants to fund with the money from Rick Moranis-look-a-like Bill.

Read here.  Excerpts and comments:

All of this can be applied to “The Movement.” To be completely frank, there are plenty of frauds and con artists in our scene. 

What website are you writing for again?

In fact, there are probably more sociopaths and swindlers in an edgy sociopolitical set than in America’s business community.[1] Unfortunately, there are very few books dedicated to dissecting and examining “The Movement”’s many dangerous people. 

Well, there’s a blog (not a book) – EGI Notes, but I’m “crazy and bitter.”  The author of this piece is obviously not. Obviously.

However, an examination of a parallel social disaster can be extrapolated to match one’s own circumstances and serve to enlighten one in a way which might lead to progress.

Oh yes, indeed.

Carreyrou’s story of Theranos starts in November 2006 and ends in March 2018. His sources are mostly former employees. Central to the story is a Stanford dropout named Elizabeth Holmes.[3] Holmes was from a prominent family that had been successful in business, as well as in military and government service. She grew up in a high-class neighborhood in Washington, D.C. 

In other words, she is “one of the gals.”  Just like Mudshark Annie.  Indeed, the have some romantic preferences in common, it seems.

Holmes deliberately dressed like Steve Jobs. She also faked a deep voice when speaking (her voice can be heard changing in this video). Her leadership style was typical for a dynamic leader of a start-up company. 

It seems to me her style was more typical of a padded cell, but, hey, I’m crazy, so I should know, right?

Holmes enjoyed a flurry of good press and flattery . . . but the machines didn’t work, hadn’t worked, and weren’t about to start working. It was all an elaborately-constructed fraud. An October 2015 Wall Street Journal article exposed the company. Looking backwards, it is probable that Theranos was a fraud from the start…

I agree, many parallels to Der Movement.

This is the first politically correct aspect of this. All that talk about “girl power” and “strong, independent womynz” is a powerful metapolitical influence that led otherwise experienced men to fund the venture, and for a time stopped anyone from asking hard questions about her.

But when people on the Right question the “womynz” in the Alt Right, they get critiqued by Counter-Currents white-knighting.

As a result of Holmes’ respectable social background…

Anyone in Theranos who questioned the reality of the situation was shown the door. 

Or “banned” from a blog, eh?   How is Der Movement different?

There was also a culture of nepotism. 

Ethnic nepotism in Der Movement.  Hint: it’s not only the Asians and Afrowop Mafiosos who practice that.

It’s All Fraud East of Suez

He hired a group of Indians to run the lab. None were qualified, and they fed into the culture of incompetence described above. Because they came on H1-B visas, they couldn’t complain about their working conditions.

Hey! These are Asian cogelites!  GNXP says we need “hundreds of thousands” more of these every year.

Carreyrou’s description of Balwani’s actions match much of what I’ve seen dealing with Asians in my own career. In short, they all “ain’t right.” In this case, I am referring to Asians in the broad sense, not just Indians. A true grasp of cause and effect seems to elude them. The scientific method didn’t originate in India or China. Essentially, east of Suez, it’s all a fraud. 

Except Steve Jobs, eh?

Learning How to Spot a Fraud

Things that mesh with the PC narrative (or any narrative) too well are often frauds. Theranos was political correctness run amok. There was a “strong womyn” running the show. 

But if you criticize the “strong womyn” making Alt Lite podcasts, Alt Right white knights (some of them apparently have no experience with women apart from blood relatives) come out to hysterically defend them.

She was in an interracial relationship. 

Just like Derbyshire.

Theranos was filled with “immigrant strivers.” In talks, Holmes invoked buzzwords as though they were part of a magical spell. She told audiences to “believe in yourself.” Others joined in on the spell-casting. General Mattis called the company a “game changer.”

Imitating the form of a thing is not the same thing as the thing itself. Elizabeth Holmes’ look and back-story was a crude imitation of the outer forms of accomplished men. The truth is, it didn’t matter how Steve Jobs dressed. What he did was actually get results.

Jobs was 50% Syrian Arab – Syria being “east of the Suez.”  But, hey, why should facts and logic get in the way of a Counter-Currents post, with the current brilliant crop of Alt Righters leading the way.  They are low information, but so what?

Beware of promises to simplify that which is very complex. Experts in the field of medicine who had really undergone the complex process were the ones to call Theranos’ bluff. (A good example of an expert with great technical knowledge spotting a fraud can be found here.)

But when someone with technical knowledge in the life sciences calls out HBD pseudoscience and “movement” race fraud, then they are labelled “crazy and bitter.”  Hypocrisy.

Elizabeth Holmes left a trail of destruction in her wake. 

Just like “movement” leaders.

On a final note, one must again emphasize the cliché that all that glitters is not gold. Things that are politically correct, i.e. “women and minorities,” always need a second, harder look. Do not enter into a transaction with any Asian that is any more difficult than bazaar levels of sophistication.

Does that include Asians infiltrating pro-White websites and organizations?  Does that include the HBD fraud?  Does that include Silk Road White nationalism?

Notes

[1] Another insight into the Theranos disaster is the idea that the government, in this case the Food and Drug Administration, can help get rid of quacks. It is clear that the libertarian ideological model of “small government” would have allowed Theranos to carry out its swindle longer than it should have.

Libertarianism is an absurdity.  The fact that the Alt Right had its genesis through libertarianism tells you all you need to know about the stupidity, superficial juvenile attitudes, and aberrant ideology.

[3] Holmes was also descended from Charles L. Fleischmann (1835-1897), a wealthy manufacturer of yeast. Fleischmann was Jewish but married outside of the group. So while she had some Jewish ancestry, it is impossible to put Holmes in any ethnic category other than that of Wilmot Robertson’s American Majority.

Hey, she’s OK then.  After all, she has a Nordish ranking of 2.6439751, so what’s the problem?  She left a trail of destruction in her wake, but she’s still a whole lot better than a bunch of greasy five foot tall Afrowop brownsters scurrying around like roaches over the landscape of a once great country they ruined.

Holmes probably would have been more successful if she had concentrated on medical issues more in her “wheelhouse” – such as novel testing approaches for vaginal yeast infections.

Advertisements

In Der News, 6/9/18

Der news.

Sunic foreword to Bolton’s Yockey book.

That’s the foreword to the book itself; insofar as I know, currently, I am the only one who has written an independent review of this important work.  That speaks volumes about the pathetic, low-rent “movement.”

Getting back to Sunic’s foreword, I’d like to say that Tom is one of the finest people involved in nationalist activism.  I don’t agree with everything he’s ever written of course, but people can disagree on issues but still think highly of each other, respect fine work, and note their essential decency as human beings.  Indeed, I sometimes disagree with Salter on some issues (as recently chronicled in posts here), but I cannot think of anyone whose work I respect more.  As I’ve said a number of times before – Salter deserves a Nobel Prize for his work on ethnic genetic interests; in a fair world, one not dominated by anti-White leftist politics, that Prize would be awarded.

By the way, Sunic probably doesn’t remember it, but he and I had a pleasant phone conversation many (15+) years ago.  A good man.

More evidence (if you needed any) that Sallis is right once again: the Danish left is farstreaming right.  Evidence to support mainstreaming: zero.  Evidence to support farstreaming: Trump, Orban, Denmark, etc.

Best Amren comment, in response to this article:

Jason Lewis • 10 hours ago
Right after they tell you that population numbers are concerning they’ll tell you that there aren’t enough babies being born in Western countries requiring a endless flood of immigrants.

More SLC News

In Der News.

Primate Negress and Neo-Marxist legal group censors Spencer.  I despise the Alt Right for making a mockery of racial activism, but I support their free speech rights, and would certainly choose Spencer to support over some alien Africaness.

Spencer and company have legitimate grounds to sue, tortious interference for starters; if this censorship is targeted only to pro-White groups, leaving alone Colored extremists, then extending the interference to discriminatory grounds is possible.

The objection would be: no money for lawyers.  Yes, keep on giving the lion’s share of “movement” money to keep the Happy Penguins and Latrine Flies Derbyshire living well, that’s the ticket, right?  There IS money, it’s just not going to Spencer and other hard-liners.  Whose fault is that?  Blame yourselves, Der Movement rank-and-file.  Another objection: can’t find a lawyer. If Der Movement had taken the advice, given, literally, for decades (two of them in my case), from some people to first build an infrastructure (including a designated legal team) and then engage in public hijinks, this situation would not exist.  Spencer needs to get back online first, second, needs to successfully deal with the lawfare suits targeting him, and then really needs to concentrate on infrastructure building – Richard, you need more folks on your side wearing suits and ties in courtrooms and fewer morons dressed like Captain America in the streets of Charlottesville.

Jewliani believes that “men are disposable” (including him?), but Milady Mantis Head Ivanka is untouchable.  I guess that’s the “fundamental premise” in action. I note that Rudy’s pussy pedestalization hasn’t prevented him from careening from one failed marriage to another.

So, we need a “big tent” strategy, but Charlottesville failed because it was open to the entire Right? Basically: whatever Spencer does is wrong.  Hypocrisy: it’s good that people don’t “shut down” Johnson when he criticizes them; on the other hand, if someone criticizes Johnson, he bans them from his website.  Fair point about GoDaddy – but that’s the price of affirmative action, no prudence, no planning, no common sense. Johnson is also correct about comments sections, including the legal implications. Johnson is also correct about free speech, consistent with my thoughts on this matter.

Is (as Johnson asserts) Taylor doing a service by dividing Jews by being pro-Jewish?  What about dividing Whites by being anti-White ethnic?  My problem with Amren in regard to this is not that they are Jew-friendly.  After all, they’ve been that way even when I was writing for them, and I accepted it as a strategic approach similar to what Johnson is talking about.  My problem is with them being pro-Jewish and at the same time anti-White ethnic.  And all the “yellow supremacist” talk just adds to it; in other words, Jews and Asians are considered high caste and White ethnics are low caste (in the case of the swarthoids, untouchables).  It’s the double standard that’s the problem.  If you are going to be accepting of Jews and avoid any and all criticism of Jews, then probably you should extend the same courtesy to all of the native peoples of Europe.  It’s not “White advocacy” to value Levantines and Orientals over Europeans.

Jewish “WNs” driven away from Amren because of MacDonald, as per Cofnas?  Nonsense.  The rabbi left because his Jewish school gave him a choice – us or them.  The other Jews left after the Duke-Hart dust-up, blame that on Duke and Hart, not MacDonald.  Finally, the Jews in Amren were destructive: Hart promoting a multiracial “White separatist state” or Levin saying that racial preservation for its own sake is “insane,” or Weissberg promoting the “racial status quo.”  And one can only imagine where Derbyshire got the “latrine flies” insult from.

Johnson hates snobs?  The lack of self-awareness is amazing.  And the supporter of intra-European ethnic cleansing denounces “imperialism” and “genocide.”  And is “drinking and drugs” really the worst “degeneracy” in the “movement?”

Robert Griffin goes semi-Nordicist.  It was just a matter of time, I guess.  Does he really think that the System supports White ethnics and is only against Nordics?  


Sailer cites 23andMe stupidities.

This retardation manifests when people start taking seriously low percentage results – I’m 4.2% this or 0.2% that – seriously, particularly at the 50% confidence rating that’s the default setting at the site.  Needless to say, the “timing the date of admixture” feature is equally ludicrous.  What’s going on with 23andMe is the same principle as Der Movement’s stupidities on race: turning legitimate science into trashy garbage tends to delegitimize the legitimate science, because the run-of-the-mill idiot is unable to distinguish science from trash.  So, biological race is real, population genetics can be interesting, and genetic kinship is fundamental to genetic interests.  But then people look at 23andMe nonsense, get confused, angry, misled, and/or disgusted, and then think the whole idea of racial genetics is nonsense, rather than the company’s product itself.  Likewise, racial science is real, and racial history is real, but Der Movement makes a mockery of it with HBD and Kempism, so many people get disgusted once they realize how they’ve been misled. Instead on turning against HBD or Kemp, they instead turn to “spiritual race” theories, like Yockey and Evola did when confronted with the nonsense of their time (Guntherism and calipers).

A Person of Tallness

About height.

Preferences for height were and are certainly not just due to an association between height and social status (and health and good nutrition).  It is likely that height was selected for, and appreciated, at least for men, because increased size gave men an advantage in combat, both for mate competition and also in warfare (this during pre-technic periods of human evolution).  Selection for height also includes extreme sexual selection by women for male height (which continues to this day); this preference is no doubt an evolved one, given the superiority of larger males in combat, providing protection for the women and offspring, and the ability to pass on these genes for tallness to the woman’s male offspring.  Further, as has been noted in a recent book review at VDARE, given that women select (or at least used to) for male intelligence as well as height, there seems to be a general trend for height and intelligence to correlate, although of course the bell curves overlap to a considerable degree.

There are of course costs to height, which may explain why, despite advantages to being taller, some ethnies are shorter than others, on average.  For example, looking at the well-known difference between taller Northern Europeans and shorter Southern Europeans (the latter, as Der Movement tells us, are low-IQ cringing subhumans), we can consider some selective pressures against height.  Larger people tend to do better in cooler climates rather than in the warmer clines of the south. Further, larger people require a greater caloric intake to maintain their mass, which necessitates more calorie-dense foods.  Northern Europe’s generally cool and wet climate allowed for agriculture that provided a diet rich in calorie-dense foods, such as (red) meat and dairy.  In the warmer and drier south, a more plant-based diet would have been insufficient to maintain a significant fraction of the population of larger size; in this latter scenario, smaller people would have had a long term survival advantage that more than balanced out the advantages (combat and mate competition) of height. Thus, the advantages of male height are a net evolutionary gain only in circumstances in which the environment can maintain a sizable fraction of the population being larger and with greater caloric requirements.

As Sailer suggests, cancer rates are higher in the tall; it may be in part cell number as he mentions; in addition, the increased caloric needs of the tall may help fuel cancer growth through diet (there are associations between diet/energy consumption and cancer, particularly between caloric-dense foods and cancer), and increased growth signaling, particularly in the young growing stage, may prime the body for later cancer, not only by increasing cell numbers, but, possibly, by epigenetic and other changes in the cells themselves.

However, this cancer link is generally not counter-selective against height, at least not in human evolutionary history, as cancer typically is a disease in the older (Sailer’s case being one exception, as are childhood cancers and some of those due to inherited mutations), past prime reproductive age, individuals.  It is a cost of height, though, at the individual and public health levels.

As to Sailer’s main thesis, why “heightism” is not a SJW issue, we must consider that Female Privilege plays a role.  Milady always gets her way (Roissy being correct about the “Fundamental Premise” – females being considered more valuable, and catered to, because eggs are more valuable than sperm).  Male height is a female preference, so discrimination against short men is socially acceptable.  Female thinness is a male preference, so that is socially unacceptable “fat shaming” – instead we must celebrate “curvy women” – an euphemism for disgusting piles of sweaty lard, with the BMI of a neutron star, rolling around the landscape, each consuming more calories in  a day than the entire world population of blue whales does in a year.  When you consider that men really can’t do anything about their height, while women can certainly lose weight, the fact that an immutable characteristic is “shamed” while a changeable one is not tells you all you need to know of the raw dominant power of Female Privilege (aka, the Yeastbucket Advantage).

In Der News, 4/15/18

Some news.

MACA: Make America Cucked Again.

Are the homoerotic fanboys off the Trump Train yet?

I’m sure cuck nagger Roissy will regale us with all sorts of evidence of how Trump is striking against the “Globohomo” regime, by doing such world historical activities such as spewing forth insulting tweets or “negging” an old French cradle-robbing hag. Are all you guys “tired of winning yet?”  More concern about the borders of Syria than the borders of America – did we elect John McAmnesty?

The Yeastbucket Tax

In a fundamental sense, these programs are equivalent to the cuckolding of all tax-paying men. Cuckolding is when a woman has a child by one man but convinces a second that it is his in order to deceptively gain access to his accumulated resources. Men with self-respect and dignity do not pay for the children of other men. Welfare programs are similar except deception is not required because the state acts as the coercive middle man who makes the cuckolding mandatory. It is also less obvious than the personal case because the costs are dispersed among all productive men and they generally never interact with the single mothers directly to see their money being wasted. This wealth, which would be better spent by productive men providing for their own biological children, is forcibly taken from them to pay for women who have made extremely poor personal decisions in their lives and produced children statistically much more likely to be involved in criminal and disorderly behavior. The increased criminality of children of single mothers is a large externality which costs a society a great deal in terms of increasing police and prison spending on top of the direct wealth transfer programs.
The recent introduction of the “affordable” health care act also acts as a wealth transfer from working-age men to women. Men go to the doctor and need medical care much less frequently than women. Before the new health care law, insurers were able to adjust prices based on gender to reflect actual costs. No more. Now men and women cannot be charged differently based on actual medical care use and single men are even required to pay for personal coverage which can only benefit women, such as maternity coverage. The result is that healthcare costs for young men have increased substantially more than for women of all ages. The average increase was 56% for men compared to 4% for women though in specific areas the average increase for young men has been as high as 200%.[vii]  Car insurance shows the opposite pattern where men are made to pay more due to their greater likelihood of getting into catastrophic crashes (women are more likely to have an accident, but those are usually minor). Unsurprisingly, there has been no attempt to enforce “equality” in this situation.

Listen to this. What was the ethnicity of Justice Frankfurter?  HuWhyte.

Brown vs. Board of Education: A Jewish-Negro alliance against White interests.  Curiously, greasy low–IQ Afrowops and hora-dancing Romanians were not players in that fiasco.

How Darwin differed from HBD.  The relevant parts are highlighted:

There is a contradiction between Darwin’s methodology and how he described it for public consumption. Darwin claimed that he proceeded “on true Baconian [inductive] principles and without any theory collected facts on a wholesale scale.” He also wrote, “How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service!” The scientific method includes 2 episodes. The first consists of formulating hypotheses; the second consists of experimentally testing them. What differentiates science from other knowledge is the second episode: subjecting hypotheses to empirical testing by observing whether or not predictions derived from a hypothesis are the case in relevant observations and experiments. A hypothesis is scientific only if it is consistent with some but not other possible states of affairs not yet observed, so that it is subject to the possibility of falsification by reference to experience. Darwin occupies an exalted place in the history of Western thought, deservedly receiving credit for the theory of evolution. In The Origin of Species, he laid out the evidence demonstrating the evolution of organisms. More important yet is that he discovered natural selection, the process that accounts for the adaptations of organisms and their complexity and diversification. Natural selection and other causal processes of evolution are investigated by formulating and testing hypotheses. Darwin advanced hypotheses in multiple fields, including geology, plant morphology and physiology, psychology, and evolution, and subjected them to severe empirical tests.

SLC News, 3/30/18

Yet more stupidity, lies, and cowardice.

Quota Queen Alert!

Hmmm…who was it who predicted the downfall of the Alt Right – that the Alt Right fever would eventually burn itself out?

“Movement” failure can be chalked up to three inter-related reasons:

1. A defective ideology; the same old tired fossilized memes, sweaty racial fantasies, obsessive ethnic fetishism, rigid dogma, all with a healthy helping of solipsism, self-delusion, and pseudoscience.

2. A failed leadership.  Affirmative action leads to incompetence, and this holds true not only for “women and minorities” in the broader society, but also for “cuck naggers” in Der Movement.

3. A significant fraction, possibly a majority, of rank-and-file activists are Type I Nutzi defectives.

So, the defective ideology justifies the affirmative action policy and attracts the Nutzis. The failed leaders grasp onto the ideology that props up their own “leadership,” while the Nutzis support and enable the tragicomic failures of their leaders.

Neither the leaders nor the followers will condemn themselves and break the cycle, and they certainly will not denounce the ideology that forms the center of (what passes for) their identity.

A New Movement needs to arise to displace the crumbling ruin of the Old.  Do I believe that will happen?  No, but I will continue being a “voice in the wilderness” and hold out hope.

Roissy endorses this comment:

One thing that beta male white knight faggots don’t want to hear about is the obsession that bitches have with wanting to fuck mass murderers. […]
If you want to live in some fantasy dreamworld where “they’re not all like that” then go ahead, but if you don’t accept the truth you’re just going to go through your entire life getting fucked over by these skanks.
Conversely, if you look at them as what they are – stupid, wild animals – they you might have a chance to make a relationship with one work. Just always remember that as a boyfriend/husband you are basically a zookeeper, trying to keep control over a twisted amoral beast.

I endorse the comment as well, the description is 100% correct.  It goes off the rails with its subsequent prescription: we need “game” you see, which is, in essence, pure pussy pedestalization; men need to modulate their every word and action, down to the most minute detail, to appeal to these “twisted amoral beasts.”

How about this: NO.

Sir MGTOW vs. the Yeastbuckets!

Yeah, and there’s no god either, but Frannie boy won’t tell you that.

The Sallistrian religious paradox: The higher one goes up the religious hierarchy the less likely one is to actually believe in god or all the other religious nonsense.

Some old hag fumbling with her rosaries in church believes unconditionally, a priest has his doubts, a bishop understands the value of religion for social control, and the college of cardinals, and the pope derived from then, knows full well the truth and its ideological utility.

Surprise, surprise.  “America’s Senator” fails again.

Hey Jeff, just do what you do best: stand around helplessly, looking like a Howdy Doody doll without the ventriloquist.

I don’t think so, Donnie.

Dem Russkis are already ahead of us and pulling away fast.  Hint: having a nuclear deterrent that dates from the 1960s and 70s, with some sprinkling from the 80s, is not going to scare Russia or China.  Another hint: the constant US trend to downscale its nuclear bomb arsenal in both numbers and yield per weapon is not going to scare anyone either.  I realize, Donnie, that your Presidency, nay your entire existence, is all about empty blustering, but the hard men of Russia and China are not going to be deterred by your windbag exhortations.  No, only true force will do the job, and true force includes missiles than are not older than the fathers of the men whose fingers are on the button, and true force includes nuclear bombs than actually have yields greater than the early atom bombs of the late 40s.

Chinese Nationalist Whore writes:

As a Chinese, I come from a highly collectivistic society and I find it deeply naïve to think that Jews as a group will not have a major advantage over individuals who do not network in the same ethnocentric way.

Yes, indeed, and one good reason (besides of course their alien genotypes and phenotypes) Chinese should not be allowed into Western nations and should not be allowed on Western blogs.

As a kind Japanese writer named Riki Rei at Counter Currents points out, the Chinese elite is in bed with the Jewish elite.

Of course, the MR Silkers who say that any criticism of China is due to the critic being “a Jew or someone who sucks Jewish cock” (their words, not mine, in case you the reader are offended by the vulgarity).

Of course the Chinese are “in bed” with the Jews – the problem is that the Silkers want the Chinese to be in bed with them, literally, preferably all those Chinese girls with guns who are going to the “border guards of the West.”  Among White manlets, Silk Road White nationalism is nothing more or less than masochistic yellow fever fetishism.

Behold the Female: An Alt Right Observation

It’s true.

One of the best Alt Right comments is this, about the “Fall 2017 Sexual Harassment Moral Panic” – 

This begs the question: Do women have objective standards of morality, or do they simply take their cues from TV and social media?  Do I need to even answer that question?  If women were more independent-minded, they wouldn’t need to wait for a hashtag to proliferate in order to bring their stories to the public.