I’m shooting the wind a bit here on the subject of financial muscle and political influence, so let me know if any of my assumptions are obviously wrong.

Here we go ...

One lesson that comes through loud and clear from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign is that small-scale individual funding can compete in the political market.  In excess of ninety-nine per cent of Paul’s funds has come from individuals.  Forty-seven per cent has been raised from contributions of $200 or less.

Now, as these things go, the appeal of a Presidential Campaign is high-voltage, short-term, eyes-on-the-prize stuff.  “The Ron Paul Revolution” has to motivate donors only as long as it motivates enough voters to keep Paul in the game.  However, while the race for the Republican Nomination obtains, both supporter categories have an inbuilt - though quite generous - limit in terms of numbers.  They are drawn from that fraction of the American voting public that can identify institutional politics, and deduce that it serves not them but the institutional interests who fund it.  That’s the nature of the Revolution.

My guess is that the IQ gateway for that deductive capacity lies somewhere between 105 and 110.  Given that voting is itself an IQ filter, maybe two-thirds of the white voting public could, theoretically, be expected to know why they supported Paul in the booth - should they do so.  (This is not to say that the votes of others who simply “like Ron Paul” or “agree with him on the war” aren’t just as welcome, but a Revolution has to be a bit more revolutionary than that.)

Paul may or may not travel far down the presidential road in 2008.  But in shining a light for his brand of strict Constitutionalism he has shone a light for anti-institutionalism.  And that, clearly, has some carry-over into the much weightier and vexing question of the future of white America.

Now let’s look at the scale of the challenge confronting race-conscious white intellectuals as they contemplate Ron Paul’s already surprising achievement.

READ MORE...

More evidence, blind poll canvassing would be better for the Ron Paul campaign than normal canvassing.  A video describing MSNBC’s equivalent of an online “blind poll” showing how candidates match up with respondent positions:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21116732

Bloomberg reports that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a landmark case on the Second Amendment (right of “the people” to keep and bear arms with military intent).  The last time the Court heard a Second Amendment case was 1939—yielding an ambiguous decision.  So why the long wait to rule on such an important issue as the right of the people to overthrow a despotic government with their own militia?  It appears the Supreme Court was waiting for the perfectly bad opportunity:

1. The people increasingly see the government as despotic: e.g. the Ron Paul movement.
2. Following the old maxim that “Hard Cases Make Bad Law” the Court needed to wait until the would-be despots had the most pathological case imaginable:  Washington D.C.

Washington D.C. is among the most extreme outliers imaginable for testing law—and particularly with the high population of blacks and crime rate through the roof, it represents the nearly perfect opportunity for the Supreme Court to grab the weapons from all of “the people”.

Here are some of the would be despots solemnly presenting yet another case of gun crime in the nation’s pathological capitol:

And here are the rank orderings of Washington D.C., compared to the 50 states, in various attributes showing just how pathologically perfect it is for a despotic ruling:

READ MORE...

The Japanese are an ageing people with the low-birthrate typical today of a prosperous first-world economy.  The Japanese are also fiercely ethnocentric, and really, really don’t intend to import millions of black and brown gaijin.  The Japanese are also crazy about horizon technology, especially electronic gadgetry.

The result?

It’s on display at the 2007 International Robot Exhibition in Tokyo, a 1,000-booth show that ends tomorrow.  The greater part of the floor area is devoted to manufacturing robots, since that’s where the money is today.  But the buzz is coming from the non-manufacturing robot sector, which is still in its initial research phase.  The vision shared in the big Japanese corporations, universities and public research institutes involved in this effort is of a future in which, if robots don’t do everything (human contact work, for example), they will certainly share in the execution of the more utilitarian tasks.

The main categories where development is proceeding now are: maintenance (inspection, repair); home automation (cleaning, security); life assistance (for medical and welfare use); entertainment; hobbies.

The Guardian ran a piece on the exhibition today:-

In Japan, robots can already be found working as home helps, office receptionists and security guards, as well as on the factory floor. There were more than 370,000 industrial robots in use in Japan in 2005, according to a report by Macquarie bank, 40% of the world total, with 32 robots for every 1,000 manufacturing workers. The economy ministry calculates that the Japanese robot market will be worth more than £26bn by 2025.

There are compelling economic reasons for Japan’s obsession with robots. The population recently went into long-term decline and a reduced workforce is expected to struggle to fill jobs in the health and welfare sectors. As long as Japanese leaders remain cautious about relaxing immigration laws, robots will be seen as at least part of the solution.

Here are a very few of the Tokyo machines I’ve been able to identify:-

Hitachi’s EMIEW2 is an office worker.  Of course.  What else?

READ MORE...

My thanks to Micheal R for this link, an article by the near-libertarian Jewish-Russian-American blogger Eugene Volokh.

Richard Warman, a lawyer who worked as an investigator for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, often filed complaints against “hate speech” sites — complaints that were generally upheld under Canadian speech restrictions. Fromm, a defender of various Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, has been publicly condemning Warman for, among other things, being “an enemy of free speech.” Warman sued, claiming that these condemnations are defamatory.

Friday, the Ontario Superior Court held for Warman — chiefly on the grounds that because Warman’s claims were accepted by the legal system, they couldn’t accurately be called an attack on free speech. Thus, for instance:

  [25] The implication, as well as the clear of meaning of the words [“an enemy of free speech” and “escalated the war on free speech”], is that the plaintiff is doing something wrong. The comment “Well, see your tax dollars at work” also implies that Mr. Warman misused public funds for this “war on free speech”.

  [26] The plaintiff was using legal means to complain of speech that he alleged was “hate” speech.

  [27] The evidence was that Mr. Warman was successful in both the complaint and a libel action which he instituted.

  [28] Freedom of expression is not a right that has no boundaries. These parameters are outlined in various legislative directives and jurisprudence. I find Mr. Fromm has exceeded these. This posting is defamatory.

Likewise, apropos another statement (“Since then, a number of dissidents have been dragged before human rights tribunals, largely through the efforts of CHRC hatchetman Richard Warman”), the court responds:

  [32] While opposition to legislation is permitted, it is defamatory to say that Mr. Warman is largely responsible for “dragging” dissidents before the human rights tribunal, when in fact the “dissidents” were disseminating prohibited hate speech. The tribunal upheld the complaint. This posting is also defamatory.

Likewise, here’s another statement that the court treated as defamatory and legally punishable:

  [48] At the press conference after Mr. Fromm’s comments, he introduced three other people who spoke of their “problems with Richard Warman.” Mr. Fromm added, after one speaker:

      Thank you very much, Jason. So, for posting an opinion, the same sort of opinion that might have appeared in editorial pages in newspapers across this country, Jason and the Northern Alliance, his site has come under attack and people who are just ordinary Canadians find themselves in front of the courts for nothing more serious than expressing their opinion. This is being done with taxpayers’ money. I find that reprehensible.

  [49] In one posting Mr. Fromm describes Mr. Warman’s “campaign of intimidation” recitingvarious actions taken by Mr. Warman. He states that freedom of the Internet was the key issue.

  [50] Again Mr. Warman was referred to as acting like a one-man thought police agency.

  [51] The plaintiff is accused of using taxpayer money to “restrict freedom of speech” and of refusing “to allow those with differing opinions the right to express their views.”

  [52] The tone of all these allegations is derisive and holds the plaintiff up to ridicule and contempt. The words themselves and the inferences to be drawn are all defamatory.

Likewise, the court says, “[59] Mr. Warman is criticized for his anti-hate speech stance, and his professionalism and integrity are attacked. This would lead a reasonable reader to conclude that the plaintiff was an ideologue who wanted only to deny freedom of speech to those with whom he disagrees. [60 ]I find this posting defamatory.”

READ MORE...

Oxford Unite Against Fascism, Oxford University Student Union, Oxford & District Trades Council, Oxford University Labour Club, Oxfordshire UNISON Health, Oxford Brookes University Unison branch and Unite Against Fascism have called a peaceful demonstration against fascist BNP leader Nick Griffin and Holocaust denier David Irving who are due to speak in the free speech form [sic] on Monday 26th November at the Oxford Union.

... Fascism threatens the safety of Black, Jewish, Muslim, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people of Oxford including students and academics. Wherever fascists are active or have a presence, racist attacks and other hate crimes increase.

For transport/coach details, please contact National UAF office ...

So ran the instructions to the thousand freaks, self-haters, simple minds and Jewish and “BEM” activists who screamed and occasionally became violent outside the Oxford Union Free Speech Forum last night.  How far we have come from the “rainbow coalition” invented by Ken Livingstone in his GLC administration of the early 80s.  Now the heir to this poisonous confection dictates acceptable speech and even debate about acceptable speech.

Anyhow, let’s get a flavour of what it was like inside the building.

Simon Darby of the BNP managed to record part of Nick Griffin’s speech - albeit, apparently, by employing technology no more effective than the wax disc.  You can hear it, complete with the baying mob without, and a heartening round of applause from Griffin’s audience to finish, here.

Griffin spoke in a separate room from Irving, who was in the main debating chamber.  The mob had made it impossible for some of the ticket-holders to access the latter.  So the police, who don’t seem to have been especially effective, ushered them to another room.  The speakers were split accordingly.

READ MORE...

I just got off the phone with another Ron Paul supporter—this one an official Ron Paul campaign organizer in a major metropolitan area—who told me that his Republican County Chairman sent out a notice to the Republican Party mailing list for that county announcing the grand opening of the campaign headquarters for Mitt Romney.  Romney’s “campaign headquarters” turned out to be a gas station with a little folding table holding a dish rack holding bumper stickers, buttons, etc. with hardly anyone showing to the “grand opening”.  The Ron Paul organizer then notified the Republican County Chairman of the date of the grand opening of the Ron Paul campaign headquarters.  The Ron Paul campaign headquarters being opened is a retail store which the merchant has agreed to convert to a full campaign office with several times the floor space supporting walk-in service to the public.  As with most other metro areas the Ron Paul supporters are far more numerous and active.

The Republican County Chairman refused to send out a notice of of the grand opening of the Ron Paul campaign headquarters.

When asked why he would send notice for Mitt Romney’s lame HQ opening but not for the robust Ron Paul campaign and headquarters, the Chairman replied:

“Because I can.”

This is some way to treat the Republican candidate that has the best likelihood of being elected President, if nominated, according to such hard-nosed measures as the Zogby blind poll of general voters and the intrade.com prediction market:

Two nights of riots  and counting:-

Thirty police officers have been injured in a second night of violence between youths and officers in the flashpoint suburb of Villiers-le-Bel in Paris.

About 160 riot police came under attack in the notoriously crime-ridden district, 20 miles north of the centre of the French capital.

The violence was sparked on Sunday by the deaths of two young boys, who were killed when their moped collided with a police car.

The boys who died were said by locals to be “aged between 12 and 13”.

Police insisted that their car had not been chasing the boys when the crash occurred soon after dusk.

Two years ago just such an event triggered 20 nights of rioting, and accounted for almost 9,000 torched vehicles and 2,888 arrests.  A state of emergency was declared.  The French media stopped reporting the incidence of burned cars for fear of giving succour to Le Front National.  And in April of this year Nicolas Sarkozy got himself elected, in part by stealing the FN’s clothes.

Now there’s no incentive for Sarko the American to play to white France.  He’ll look to avoid inflaming the situation, and distance himself from it if the unrest continues.