BOOMERBUSTER

BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO

Friday, August 2, 2019

THE ANI-ASI MIXTURE OCCURRED IN THE CONTEXT OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

It occurred, as the Rigveda establishes, in the context of racial stratification.

Differences in social power between men and women: males from populations with more power tend to pair with females from populations with less.

He calls this pattern of asymmetric population mixture disturbingly familiar.

This pattern was certainly disturbing to the subject population. 

But hey, that was and is what getting subjugated is all about!

Getting subjugated by China is hardly going to be a picnic, or a walk in Central Park, for the likes of the primates of Park Avenue, baby.

It did not disturb the dominant population so much, although it would have troubled both dominant females, and subjugated males very much. Sometimes these deeply troubled groups made perverse common cause too. 

Eunuchs in the Seraglio is a locus classicus! 

Soul On Ice, "The Allegory of the Black Eunuchs"...........

In the case of Reich's analogy of racial mixing re African Americans, p 137, it was nothing less than a national disgrace and a national disaster for most all white people at that time, in the 1860s, regardless of their views on slavery, especially from the perspective of northerners, who thought they fought the Civil War to arrest and to prevent it.

The example of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings, an incredibly scandalous story for colonial white Americans, is instructive of the views and feelings of all white colonists in the 18th century regarding race mixing.

It may well be that the struggle between the pure and impure forces with which the RigVeda opens is precisely the kind of struggle that Northern white racist purists thought they were waging against an impure and expansive Southern confederacy of color.

LET'S PUSH ON TO REICH'S ACCOUNT OF WEST EURASIAN MALE SEX ABUSE IN INDIA

I suspect that the account of West Eurasian white abuse and oppression of populations of color now goes back to the beginning of hominids, but we need to consult with Vox on how to frame this stupendous discovery.

How about this: 

First, say 1.5 M years ago, lighter colored chimps or bonobos, then only living in darkest Africa, first abused darker colored chimps or bonobos, in the Garden of Eden.

The lighter colored males would obviously have dominated the darker colored females, because as Reich points out:

"Males from populations with more power tend to pair with females from populations with less." DR

How about that for a start.

RE DAVID REICH'S WHIG INDIA HINDUISM CASTE SYSTEM IS ALL ABOUT RACE

Wikipedia: Varna (Hinduism) 

But beware: The wikipedia article is filled with Whig bullshit.


Varna (varṇa (वर्ण)) is a Sanskrit term. It is derived from the root vṛ, meaning "to cover, to envelop, count, classify, consider, describe or choose" (compare vṛtra).[14]


The word appears in the Rigveda, where it means "colour, outward appearance, exterior, form, figure or shape".[3] The word means "color, tint, dye or pigment" in the Mahabharata.[3][clarification needed] Varna contextually means "colour, race, tribe, species, kind, sort, nature, character, quality, property" of an object or people in some Vedic and medieval texts.[3] Varna refers to four social classes in the Manusmriti.

DAVID REICH HAVING IT BOTH WAYS

'Ancient DNA has established major migrations and mixture between highly divergent populations as a key force shaping human prehistory, and ideologies that seek a return to a mythical purity are flying in the face of hard science.' DR, p 121.

'In the oldest text of Hinduism, the Rig Veda, the warrior god Indra rides against his impure enemies, or dasa, in a horse-drawn chariot, destroys their fortresses, or pur, and secures land and water for his people, the arya, or Aryans.' DR, p 123.

For Indra, the purity of his arya people, and the impurity of the dasa, while not perhaps genetically correct according to Reich, must have been based on something about which we know very little or nothing.

it certainly wasn't mythical purity at all, either for Indra or for his people.

Let's just put it this way: 

Indra and his arya people, primitive people to say the least, did not just make up, in a postmodern way, the difference they obviously perceived, or read into, and then acted on, regarding the dasa

Maybe the dasa were worshippers of a rival priesthood within the same overarching temple cult. That would explain the issue of ritual purity versus impurity. That would also explain the terminology, by analogy to the Old Testament Hebrews and the rivalry between Moses and Aaron.

They were quite real rather than mythical, a present reality 5 thousand years ago or so.

If it was not borne out by differences of DNA

(and that detail, as between the arya and the dasa, whoever they may have been in relation to Reich's  more general data, seems not to have either been borne out or confuted by Reich here), 

that did not make it any less a real question of purity of some sort, and and did not rule out perhaps perceptible and marked racial and cultural differences as well, either then or now.

DAVID LEONHARDT WILL NOT BE ELECTED

FOX TRUMPS VOX

HUMAN OBSOLESCENCE TRUMPS HUMAN EQUALITY

DEMOCRATS RAMMING OBAMA UP BIDEN'S ASS

RATHER LIKE DOUGLAS RAMMING NEGROES UP LINCOLN'S!

It was not a winner for Douglas..............

Andrew Johnson tried to put in place Lincoln's supposed Reconstruction program. 

Even that may have been Lincoln faux, knowing as he must have, that that program would not be approved in any event anyway.

Johnson payed dearly for it nevertheless.

audience right now one fricking Bangladeshi

EntryPageviews
United States
3
Bangladesh
1

OLD POST RETARD TEST

Sunday, October 26, 2014

RE WIKIPEDIA BRZEZINSKI BIN LADEN ACCOUNTS

This question is for the Trilaterals, Bilderbergs, and CFRs out there:

Which pathetic account do you like less:

1. The one which says that he and his fighters were trained, backed, and financed by the CIA and MI6 and others against the Soviets.

2. The one which says that he and his fighters were merely financed by them and others?

3. The one which says that Bin Laden and his fighters weren't even on their radar?

Why?

Bear in mind that each pathetic account is pathetic for different reasons, that is, pathetic in different ways, than the other two.

There are no wrong answers.

Extra credit question:

What do I mean by ' pathetic '?

MANY RETARDS HERE THOUGHT THE COLD WAR WAS OVER WHEN USSR COLLAPSED

They thought it was over for good. End of history, Age of Aquarius, Fukuyama Fallacy stuff. 

Among retards I count think tank guys like Fukuyama, Pillsbury, etc. 

Very well educated retards........

BBC: The INF treaty was signed by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987 but its collapse more than 30 years later has raised fears of a news arms race.

Thursday, August 1, 2019

BIN LADIN'S SON SHOULD HAVE BEEN SMOTHERED IN HIS CRIB

Sunday, October 26, 2014

RE WIKIPEDIA BRZEZINSKI BIN LADEN ACCOUNTS

This question is for the Trilaterals, Bilderbergs, and CFRs out there:

Which pathetic account do you like less:

1. The one which says that he and his fighters were trained, backed, and financed by the CIA and MI6 and others against the Soviets.

2. The one which says that he and his fighters were merely financed by them and others?

3. The one which says that Bin Laden and his fighters weren't even on their radar?

Why?

Bear in mind that each pathetic account is pathetic for different reasons, that is, pathetic in different ways, than the other two.

There are no wrong answers.

Extra credit question:

What do I mean by ' pathetic '?

DAVID REICH HAVING IT BOTH WAYS

'Ancient DNA has established major migrations and mixture between highly divergent populations as a key force shaping human prehistory, and ideologies that seek a return to a mythical purity are flying in the face of hard science.' DR, p 121.

'In the oldest text of Hinduism, the Rig Veda, the warrior god Indra rides against his impure enemies, or dasa, in a horse-drawn chariot, destroys their fortresses, or pur, and secures land and water for his people, the arya, or Aryans.' DR, p 123.

For Indra, the purity of his arya people, and the impurity of the dasa, while not perhaps genetically correct according to Reich, must have been based on something about which we know very little or nothing.

it certainly wasn't mythical purity at all, either for Indra or for his people.

Let's just put it this way: 

Indra and his arya people, primitive people to say the least, did not just make up, in a postmodern way, the difference they obviously perceived, or read into, and then acted on, regarding the dasa

Maybe the dasa were worshippers of a rival priesthood within the same overarching temple cult. That would explain the issue of ritual purity versus impurity. That would also explain the terminology, by analogy to the Old Testament Hebrews and the rivalry between Moses and Aaron.

They were quite real rather than mythical, a present reality 5 thousand years ago or so.

If it was not borne out by differences of DNA

(and that detail, as between the arya and the dasa, whoever they may have been in relation to Reich's  more general data, seems not to have either been borne out or confuted by Reich here), 

that did not make it any less a real question of purity of some sort, and and did not rule out perhaps perceptible and marked racial and cultural differences as well, either then or now.

CHINA STOPS TRAVEL TO TAIWAN GOOD SHIT

GET THOSE CHINESE OUT OF AUSTRALIA

As the situation grows yet more tense, the impact is also being felt overseas, particularly among the hundreds of thousands of mainland Chinese and Hong Kong students studying in Australia.
At the University of Queensland, the tensions spilled over into violent clashes last week, when a group staging a support rally for the Hong Kong demonstrators were confronted by pro-Beijing protesters.

Re the global underclass Bobbitt Tittitainment Global Trap

ednesday, October 22, 2014

SEE DK CURRENT POST AND COMMENTS

One might say, following someone like Huntington, and also Carroll Quigley, farther back, but following them only in part, that the concept of poverty itself has changed over some hundreds of years, perhaps several thousand years, as have many other related concepts. 

One might say that poverty is the 'losing out', not merely of the lower so called classes, traditionally everywhere and in every civilization generally, but also of what have been called middle classes, in recent centuries in the West, in the necessarily intensified rivalry among civilizations.

BBC TRADE WAR BACKFIRING HURTING US MORE THAN CHINA

WHETHER TRUE OR FALSE: HELLO.

GAME OVER. SMELL THE COFFEE.

DNA ETC DAVID REICH WHO WE ARE AND HOW WE GOT HERE

Index: race, racism

Great stuff, plus his Whig interpretation, on every page.

'Just because many orthodox academics are wrong does not mean that every unorthodox heretic is right.' p. 262.

Some things are true even if Trump says them.....
Terms search: fallacy

Sunday, July 21, 2019

JUST BECAUSE TRUMP GOT A NEW SPEECH WRITER DOES NOT MEAN HE WAS WRONG

James Grant. CNBC roundtable chat.........

Grant, unfortunately, has fallen, along with many others, into Alice in Wonderland Fallacy Land. 

One wants to avoid a Kinsley Gaffe, and heaven forbid, sidestep a Morton's Fork: 


Saturday, July 13, 2019


THE PUNDIT PUNDIT FALLACY AND KINSLEY GAFFE

This fallacy is committed whenever one pundit incorporates the always fallacious argument of another pundit into his own fallacious argument.

It is what one might call a fallacy on a fallacy.

See also below the post on the Kinsley Gaffe, discussed by NYT pundits, in the context of fallacies..........

One difficulty is that the average person fails to realize that the incorporated argument is fallacious. 

The incorporating argument has its own, other, fallacy, as well.

What one ends up with is a regular Pig's Breakfast of Pundit Sophistry.

Here are two recent examples:

Sunday, June 23, 2019


KRUGMAN TRUMPIFYING THE FED SOME ARGUMENTS TRUE EVEN IF TRUMP MAKES THEM

Krugman is being caught in a prior Thomas L Friedman Trump gaffe:  

Some things are true even if Trump says them, a false argument (All economists' arguments are false in one or more ways, to some extent or another, or in general.)

Trump is the worst possible person to be making this argument, but that doesn't mean that the argument is wrong. PK

Wednesday, April 4, 2018


SOME THINGS TRUE EVEN IF TRUMP SAYS THEM


We are not in a trade war with China, that war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S. Now we have a Trade Deficit of $500 Billion a year, with Intellectual Property Theft of another $300 Billion. We cannot let this continue! DT



Wednesday, April 4, 2018

WHY HAVE THE LIBERALS HAD SUCH A HARD TIME SEEING WHAT EVEN TRUMP CAN SEE?



Saturday, July 28, 2018




Wednesday, March 14, 2018

re THOMAS FRIEDMAN SOME THINGS ARE TRUE EVEN IF TRUMP BELIEVES THEM


Friedman clings to his philosophy here, even while he lists an exhausting list of experts who all say we have long been getting screwed by China.
Friedman still believes in free and open trade. He believes in big time trade with China. Nixon opened the door. Clinton normalized trade relations leading to the boom that never stops. 

WTO bemoaned now by Friedman and his experts. 

What a ridiculous long term fiasco.
He believes also that the world is flat.
Some things are false even if Trump doesn't believe them either.


RE NYT LIBERACE TRUMP COHEN TAPES THOMAS FRIEDMAN TRUTH OR DARE

'Some things are true, even if Trump believes them.' TLF

Some things are false, even if Trump lies about them being false. 

Almost all reported things Trump says or fails to say, true or false, are irrelevant.  Boomerbuste


Thursday, April 26, 2018

RE DK CURRENT POST LEONHARDT KINSLEY GAFFE PUNDIT GAFFE

"It used to be, there was truth and there was falsehood. Now there is spin and there are gaffes. Spin is often thought to be synonymous with falsehood or lying, but more accurately it is indifference to the truth. A politician engaged in spin is saying what he or she wishes were true, and sometimes, by coincidence, it is. Meanwhile, a gaffe, is when a politician tells the truth — or more precisely, when he or she accidentally reveals something truthful about what is going on in his or her head. A gaffe is what happens when the spin breaks down." Kinsley Gaffe.

The Boomerbuster Butt is related to the Pundit Confession. Both are hard to ever recover from. Leonhardt has already committed the Pundit Confession, as I have pointed out here. 

Brooks, for example, a sort of greased pig at the county fair, never committed so elementary a blunder, as far as I know, but then I read him only intermittently.

By far the most common American politician faux pas is simply to make an utterly untrue statement, but one made not out of indifference to the truth at all, as described in the Kinsley Gaffe, but rather an even more elementary failing, a statement made not knowing what the truth would be if it bit the politician in the butt... 

The politician, himself, not merely his statement, then becomes a Boomerbuster Butt. It is worse than a Kinsley Gaffe, from which the politician himself perhaps, with therapy, can recover.

Saturday, July 13, 2019

THE PUNDIT PUNDIT FALLACY AND KINSLEY GAFFE

This fallacy is committed whenever one pundit incorporates the always fallacious argument of another pundit into his own fallacious argument.

It is what one might call a fallacy on a fallacy.

See also below the post on the Kinsley Gaffe, discussed by NYT pundits, in the context of fallacies..........

One difficulty is that the average person fails to realize that the incorporated argument is fallacious. 

The incorporating argument has its own, other, fallacy, as well.

What one ends up with is a regular Pig's Breakfast of Pundit Sophistry.

Here are two recent examples:

Sunday, June 23, 2019

KRUGMAN TRUMPIFYING THE FED SOME ARGUMENTS TRUE EVEN IF TRUMP MAKES THEM

Krugman is being caught in a prior Thomas L Friedman Trump gaffe:  

Some things are true even if Trump says them, a false argument (All economists' arguments are false in one or more ways, to some extent or another, or in general.)

Trump is the worst possible person to be making this argument, but that doesn't mean that the argument is wrong. PK

Wednesday, April 4, 2018

SOME THINGS TRUE EVEN IF TRUMP SAYS THEM


We are not in a trade war with China, that war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S. Now we have a Trade Deficit of $500 Billion a year, with Intellectual Property Theft of another $300 Billion. We cannot let this continue! DT


Wednesday, April 4, 2018

WHY HAVE THE LIBERALS HAD SUCH A HARD TIME SEEING WHAT EVEN TRUMP CAN SEE?

Saturday, July 28, 2018



Wednesday, March 14, 2018

re THOMAS FRIEDMAN SOME THINGS ARE TRUE EVEN IF TRUMP BELIEVES THEM


Friedman clings to his philosophy here, even while he lists an exhausting list of experts who all say we have long been getting screwed by China.
Friedman still believes in free and open trade. He believes in big time trade with China. Nixon opened the door. Clinton normalized trade relations leading to the boom that never stops. 

WTO bemoaned now by Friedman and his experts. 

What a ridiculous long term fiasco.
He believes also that the world is flat.
Some things are false even if Trump doesn't believe them either.

RE NYT LIBERACE TRUMP COHEN TAPES THOMAS FRIEDMAN TRUTH OR DARE

'Some things are true, even if Trump believes them.' TLF

Some things are false, even if Trump lies about them being false. 

Almost all reported things Trump says or fails to say, true or false, are irrelevant.  Boomerbuste


Thursday, April 26, 2018

RE DK CURRENT POST LEONHARDT KINSLEY GAFFE PUNDIT GAFFE

"It used to be, there was truth and there was falsehood. Now there is spin and there are gaffes. Spin is often thought to be synonymous with falsehood or lying, but more accurately it is indifference to the truth. A politician engaged in spin is saying what he or she wishes were true, and sometimes, by coincidence, it is. Meanwhile, a gaffe, is when a politician tells the truth — or more precisely, when he or she accidentally reveals something truthful about what is going on in his or her head. A gaffe is what happens when the spin breaks down." Kinsley Gaffe.

The Boomerbuster Butt is related to the Pundit Confession. Both are hard to ever recover from. Leonhardt has already committed the Pundit Confession, as I have pointed out here. 

Brooks, for example, a sort of greased pig at the county fair, never committed so elementary a blunder, as far as I know, but then I read him only intermittently.

By far the most common American politician faux pas is simply to make an utterly untrue statement, but one made not out of indifference to the truth at all, as described in the Kinsley Gaffe, but rather an even more elementary failing, a statement made not knowing what the truth would be if it bit the politician in the butt... 

The politician, himself, not merely his statement, then becomes a Boomerbuster Butt. It is worse than a Kinsley Gaffe, from which the politician himself perhaps, with therapy, can recover.