20 03 2019


NYT’s article about Snowplow Parenting and its deleterious effects.

This part:

Carolyn O’Laughlin worked as a director of resident life at Sarah Lawrence and Columbia, and now does a similar job at St. Louis Community College, Meramec. “I don’t talk to parents nearly as much here, where parents are down the street, as I did when the parents were across the country,” she said.

“Resident life?”  When did Meramec get dorms?

I know a lot can happen in two years, but I distinctly remember from talking to people that Meramec nor any other SLCC campus had dorms as late as the 2017 spring semester, and that if they were getting them, it would have been fairly big local news in St. Louis.



14 03 2019

Washington, D.C.;  Los Angeles

I’m just waiting for the first serious proposal that the celebrity college admissions scandal means that more affirmative action in college admissions is needed.  You know, “something-something privilege and underprivileged.”

I would have thought that the scandal would have been a segue to the much more critical and important matter of affirmative action and Elizabeth Warren-style race fraud in higher education, and maybe even a segue into serious discussion about major gut-rehab reform in higher education.

But it was me doing the thinking;  the open air asylum that calls itself the United States of America isn’t into sane reasoning.

So, instead, what we’ll get is affirmative action and celebrity bribery being played off good cop bad cop against each other.

Which means you should all start your stopwatches…NOW.


27 10 2018

Wiesbaden;  Boston;  Washington, D.C.

Believe it or not, Harvard came up as a matter of discussion tonight at Abendessen at my particular table.  Which makes me remember that I really haven’t chimed in officially with an opine, at least not in this space.

I’ve been only lightly observing and following the DOJ case against Harvard.

But I haven’t obsessed over it, because I am not investing any real hope or faith in it.  And the reasons for that are three fold:

(1) Officially, the DOJ case against Harvard has to do with yellow people.  Snore.  Really, Harvard won’t ever confess this, but if they admitted on pure merit, it would quickly turn into Hongvard, which would in turn repel non-Asian applicants.  It’s also depressing that we can’t get the best USAG under the best DOJ under the best President in my lifetime openly to care about working class white people. On this matter, they’ve all gone full cuckservative.

(2) The single most clever sentence written in AR last year, (being mindful of the fact that my “last year” was cut almost half short), was that:  “No matter at what point in American history you look, Harvard always gets its way.” With that in mind, the odds that this case will be resolved in such a way that will serve as a consternation to Harvard are very slim. 


Because so many Federal judges went to Harvard Law.

I predict that there will be a pre-verdict settlement that is 90% Harvard friendly, but part of the deal will be that, to save face, Sessions (or whoever is USAG when it happens) will spike the football in public over the 10%, while Harvard will pretend that it suffered some kind of defeat.

(3) Even if this case were resolved in such a way that we in the Alt-Right like, it still really wouldn’t be that much of a victory for us in the greater scheme of things.  To me, the pregnant question here isn’t whether affirmative action should be a gatekeeper to entrance to Harvard, it’s whether Harvard matriculation should be a gatekeeper to the entrance to the American elite.  The Feds forcing Harvard to have an Alt-Right favored or friendly admissions policy, (like that would ever happen), still wouldn’t address the more fundamental bedrock issue of Harvard (and Yale) as two of the crucial spear points of the inequality-cognitive stratification dynamo.

Here in this country, in the years after WWII, there was this program called Denazification.  Likewise, early 21st century America needs a program of Deharvardification, something which would be a key battle in the all out nuclear war against burgeoning inequality.

Smoke ‘Em If Ya Got ‘Em

29 08 2018



University of Missouri bans all tobacco products from campus

The University of Missouri is banning the use of all tobacco products on the Columbia campus, effective immediately.

Cigarettes and electronic nicotine devices have been prohibited on campus since 2013. The policy announced Tuesday expands that to include any tobacco-based product, including chewing tobacco, nicotine salt products like Juul and pipes.

But you’ll have no problem finding weed, and you won’t suffer official sanction for smoking it.

The left’s “weed good tobacco bad” forked tongue was a mystery to me for while, but I now know it’s no more complicated than the fact that they’re all about Who-Whom, good people bad people.  Weed = Good People, Tobacco = Bad People.

Catfisher Alert

19 05 2018


The regular cops and the school’s Title IX bureaucrats both say “no rape,” and the latter coming to that conclusion is big, because, these days, they’ll say that a stale old prepackaged ham sandwich in the back of the refrigerator committed rape.

So what’s really going on here?

Methinks another Jackie Coakley.

That said, I’m surprised this one didn’t punch up her phony accusation with some shattered glass tall tale.


16 05 2018


They want to kick him off the board as if he was just found out to be some kind of child molester, when all he really wants is for his district to be what everyone wants everyone and every thing else to be these days, and that is, inclusive.

Replication Crisis Goes Mainstream

10 05 2018


Here’s what’s really going on here.

For almost all of the entirety of human civilization after the agricultural revolution, the highly intelligent have made it their business to teach the rich and powerful, who become rich and powerful for whatever reason, how to use their wealth and power.

The root cause of the replication crisis is that modern day academics are pumping out junk and near junk social science and pseudo hard science studies to pander to the modern day rich and powerful and their “sensibilities.”  There will be one study, highly touted, of course, which buttresses the narrative, but nobody will be able to follow it up with results which replicate the results of the first.

The problem with worrying about the replication crisis is that the fact that the impossibility of replicating the original narrative-friendly research doesn’t stop it from being touted and believed.  Here’s an example, cited in this article:  The “stereotype threat.”  What that is, in case you’ve been under Antarctica for a few decades, is the idea that black students don’t do as well on test as white (or other) students because they’ve been told that blacks are intellectually inferior to whites/others, therefore, they just give up and don’t even try.  The obvious inference is that stereotype threat is supposed to be the justification for censoring academic and intellectual discussion of HBD, in that there is supposedly no real problem that isn’t caused by heretics even talking about the “mythical” problem in the first place.

The first time I read about stereotype threat, I instantly reasoned that it was all boo sheet from the get-go, because, where are black students officially getting the notion that they’re cognitively inferior? Are we to think that the Klan runs several major media networks and half the Ivy League? In reality, innate racial egalitarianism, and ipso facto, racism and discrimination as the root cause of practical racial differences, has been the party line since at least as long as I’ve been coherent, and more likely, at least since the end of WWII, and probably a little longer than that.

Back to the point, other than the original “research,” and I’ll get to that in a moment, nobody has been able to prove that stereotype threat even exists.  And when the original “research” was reconsidered, it was found that it really wasn’t research.  All it was was one black studies professor at Stanford or Berkeley popping off some pie in the sky theory that came into his head, asking some of his students about it, and his students, astutely interpreting what was going on, told the professor what they figured he wanted to hear, instead of honest answers.

In spite of all that, Official Amurrika still carries on like stereotype threat is a thing.

Because when lies seem to justify the narrative, nobody cares about the truth.