Author Archives: rg

“Antiracism” Sounds Benign

Writes Tom Woods:

I’d like to introduce you to somebody you should know.

The name will not be familiar. But it should be.

I’ve had Wanjiru Njoya on the Tom Woods Show, and I’ve been following her ever since. She does not care what people think of her, and speaks blunt truths because somebody has to.

Let’s get her credentials and background out of the way: Njoya is originally from Kenya, where she attended the University of Nairobi. She is currently a senior lecturer at the University of Exeter Law School, UK, and a Fellow of the UK Higher Education Academy.

She previously taught law at St. John’s College, Oxford, the London School of Economics, and Queen’s University, Canada. She has published widely in employment law and labor regulation.

She’s been an outspoken opponent of egalitarianism, censorship, “hate speech” nonsense, “antiracism,” and DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) in the workplace.

Of course, as an academic, she’s been published plenty in professional journals. But here I’ve stitched together material she’s posted over the past day or so on Twitter:

Did you know there are actual Departments of Hate Studies? Do you think you will win any argument about the meaning of “hate” against people who spent years learning CRT and now have a PhD in Hate Studies? While you were busy living your life, they were busy studying Hate.

They’re known as Hate Experts, and they’re now saying people should be jailed for “hate speech.” You may think you stand a chance debating with them the definition of “hate” because you’ll win them over with reason and logic, but you’d be wrong. Hate Studies isn’t about reason.

The rule of law is failing. Legal concepts are increasingly defined by people with PhDs in Hate Studies. Lawyers argue in court that white people mourning the death of their loved ones is “selective outrage,” as they should be mourning the historical grievances of black people.

Example [from South Africa]: “Kill the Boer is just a song. Why should Boers care about the killing of Boers? That’s selective outrage. What about my historical grievances and my land stolen in 1652? Ban the old flag; it makes me feel very unsafe when I see it displayed anywhere.” That is insane.

Example 2: people saying whiteness is psychosis, and you’re meant to treat that as a perfectly sane argument.

A civil servant sued the government for race discrimination, [on account of] DEI training that included “The Psychosis of Whiteness,” a paper which suggests white people are “psychotic, cannot be reasoned with and must be destroyed.”

The tribunal says: that’s fine, it’s just a paper, it’s not discrimination.

What can you do to help? You can’t go everywhere and fight every battle. But you can stand where you are and say no to antiracism and DEI. If more people said no they wouldn’t be as powerful as they are. Part of their power comes from the fact that most people go along with it.

If you’re still saying “well, antiracism has some good aspects and DEI could work very well if it’s done properly” then you are part of the problem.

Next time you’re sitting in your mandatory DEI training learning all about “white privilege” think about those white families in South Africa mourning the loss of their children, only to be told that’s “selective outrage” and in any case white children are just “future problems.”

Imagine not even being able to mourn the loss of your own children, your own family, because that’s “selective outrage.” Instead of expressing sympathy for your loss they tell you “land or death.” This level of horror is not even “hate speech.” It’s simply unimaginable evil.

This insanity runs very deep, and there’s nothing anybody can do to uproot it. Anybody who sees white children as “future problems” really can’t be won over with fine arguments. The best thing to do is to stop encouraging them. Yet DEI ideology does the opposite. It fuels them.

[TW note: The “future problems” remark is a reference to comments from members of the Black First Land First (BLF) party, one of whom reacted to the news of at least three white children having died after a bridge collapsed at their school by saying, “Don’t have heart to feel pain for white kids. Minus three future problems.” Another said, “I celebrate the death of our enemies, their children, their cats and dogs. That is our position.”]

Not only are they killing white farmers, but they get offended when their families express grief and sorrow. They say that’s “selective outrage.” “Why are you sad your parents were killed? That’s selective outrage because you don’t seem sad about all the black victims of crime.”

South African courts are not sure whether there’s any link between chanting “Kill the Boer” and the killing of Boers, as they say it’s just a song. But the same courts are very sure that if any black person sees the old South African flag they’ll melt, so they banned the flag.

That’s a sampling.

Jordan Peterson on Canada and the West in general

In this 25 minute video interview with a journalist from the Telegraph, he says, among other things, that the predictors of “left-wing authoritarianism” are: 1. low verbal intelligence, 2. being a woman, 3. having feminine traits, 4. having taken part in a “political correctness” course.

The traits of such people are the “dark tetrad”: 1. narcissism, 2. Machiavellianism, 3. psychopathy and 4. sadism,

There is always a small number of psychopaths, about 3 percent, in every society. If they rise to 5 percent, people realise there is a problem (“we have to beat back the snakes”) and they beat them back. If they fall to 1 percent, people lose their guard and become “too nice”, which the psychopaths exploit, so they grow back again to 3 or more percent.

We’re in a post-Christian era. He also talks about Covid, climate change and “group rights” (which are an oxymoron because there is no such thing as group responsibilities).

The new Stasi is the old Stasi, refined

A past warning from GDR civil rights campaigner

In 1991[!], shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Germany, a former GDR leading civil rights campaigner named Bärbel Bohley uttered this warning:

“All these investigations, the thorough research into the Stasi structures, the methods with which they worked and still work, all this will fall into the wrong hands. One will examine these structures in detail – in order to then take them over. They will be adapted a little to suit a free Western society.

They won’t necessarily arrest the troublemakers either. There are more subtle ways to disarm someone. But the secret bans, the watching, the suspicion, the fear, the isolation and exclusion, the branding and muzzling of those who don’t conform – that will come back, believe me. Institutions will be created that will work much more effectively, much more finely than the Stasi. The constant lying will also come back, the disinformation, the fog in which everything loses its contour.”

Quote (in German) found here.

A Draconian New Law Went Into Effect on August 25th That Institutes Extreme Censorship of the Internet on a Global Basis

Article by Michael Snyder.

Excerpts:

The Internet just changed forever, but most people living in the United States don’t even realize what just happened.  A draconian new law known as the “Digital Services Act” went into effect in the European Union on Friday, and it establishes an extremely strict regime of Internet censorship that is far more authoritarian than anything we have ever seen before.  From this point forward, hordes of European bureaucrats will be the arbiters of what is acceptable to say on the Internet.  If they discover something that you have said on a large online platform that they do not like, they can force that platform to take it down, because someone in Europe might see it.  So even though this is a European law, the truth is that it is going to have a tremendous impact on all of us.

Initially, there will be 19 giant online platforms that will be forced to comply with this new law…

But starting on February 24th, 2024, the Digital Services Act will start applying to a much broader spectrum of online platforms that have fewer than 45 million monthly users.

You might be tempted to think that you will be able to avoid all of this censorship because you do not live in Europe. Unfortunately, that is simply not true. If you post something that someone in Europe might see, your content comes under the jurisdiction of this horrifying new law. So you need to brace yourself for a level of Internet censorship that none of us have ever seen before.

From this point forward, it is going to become much more difficult to share alternative views on the Internet.

For a long time, the Internet allowed ordinary people like you and ordinary people like me to share truth with a world that was desperate for it.

But now the gatekeepers are exerting a draconian level of control, and the Internet will never, ever be the same again.

Modern Medicine’s Great Controversy by Dr. Peter McCullough, Mises Institute Speech

31 minute speech here. (Also here and here.)

Modern Medicine’s Great Controversy by Dr. McCullough, Mises Institute Speech, Medical Freedom Summit, Windham, NH, August 19, 2023. This speech was followed by a wonderful presentation from ethicist and former professor of medicine Dr. Aaron Kheriaty. The audience was a prestigious group of intellectuals and business magnates hosted by Joe Matarese in Windham, New Hampshire.

Something is happening in Argentina

They may be about to elect the world's first AnCap president

Says Doug Casey in this interview.

Excerpt:

Milei is totally sound from an economic, political, and a philosophical point of view. But—and this is critically important—he’s sound from a moral point of view.

He deals in basic concepts of good and evil, right and wrong. That’s something that no politician anywhere discusses, certainly not in South America. It’s the equivalent of hitting a donkey between the eyes with a two-by-four to get his attention. Everyone intuitively understands that the political class is essentially criminal—but only Milei is brave enough to say it. The average guy wants to do the right thing, the moral thing. That’s what Milei is pointing out to people and why they like him. He doesn’t use doubletalk, brook compromise, or support half measures.

The Royal Society’s lockdown pseudoscience

This once venerable scientific institution has ignored all of the real-world evidence against the Covid restrictions.

Article by David Livermore.

Excerpt:

Real-world evidence against NPIs [Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions] is also nowhere to be found in the Royal Society’s report. Although only a minority of countries adopted few or no restrictions in response to the pandemic, Belarus, Sweden and Nicaragua can all be counted as examples. They are the closest to a control group that we have if we are truly to understand the effects of NPIs. However, searching the report for these countries returns zero hits. This is odd, considering that South Korea appears 52 times and China 19 times.