ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Are you a liberal?

James Burnham devised a test to distinguish liberal-progressives from conservative-reactionaries in 1965. See how you do; you will very likely be surprised to see where you land in light of how much the Overton Window has moved to the Left in the last 53 years.

IT IS NOT TOO DIFFICULT TO DEVISE a fairly accurate diagnostic test for liberalism. In individual and group experiments over the past several years I have often used, for example, the following set of thirty-nine sentences. The patient is merely asked whether he agrees or disagrees with each sentence—agrees or disagrees by and large, without worrying over fine points.

1. All forms of racial segregation and discrimination are wrong.
2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion.
3. Everyone has a right to free, public education.
4. Political, economic or social discrimination based on religious belief is wrong.
5. In political or military conflict it is wrong to use methods of torture and physical terror.
6. A popular movement or revolt against a tyranny or dictatorship is right, and deserves approval.
7. The government has a duty to provide for the ill, aged, unemployed and poor if they cannot take care of themselves.
8. Progressive income and inheritance taxes are the fairest form of taxation.
9. If reasonable compensation is made, the government of a nation has the legal and moral right to expropriate private property within its borders, whether owned by citizens or foreigners.
10. We have a duty to mankind; that is, to men in general.
11. The United Nations, even if limited in accomplishment, is a step in the right direction.
12. Any interference with free speech and free assembly, except for cases of immediate public danger or juvenile corruption, is wrong.
13. Wealthy nations, like the United States, have a duty to aid the less privileged portions of mankind.
14. Colonialism and imperialism are wrong.
15. Hotels, motels, stores and restaurants in the Southern United States ought to be obliged by law to allow Negroes to use all of their facilities on the same basis as whites.
16. The chief sources of delinquency and crime are ignorance, discrimination, poverty and exploitation.
17. Communists have a right to express their opinions.
18. We should always be ready to negotiate with the Soviet Union and other communist nations.
19. Corporal punishment, except possibly for small children, is wrong.
20. All nations and peoples, including the nations and peoples of Asia and Africa, have a right to political independence when a majority of the population wants it.
21. We always ought to respect the religious beliefs of others.
22. The primary goal of international policy in the nuclear age ought to be peace.
23. Except in cases of a clear threat to national security or, possibly, to juvenile morals, censorship is wrong.
24. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom.
25. The money amount of school and university scholarships ought to be decided primarily by need.
26. Qualified teachers, at least at the university level, are entitled to academic freedom: that is, the right to express their own beliefs and opinions, in or out of the classroom, without interference from administrators, trustees, parents or public bodies.
27. In determining who is to be admitted to schools and universities, quota systems based on color, religion, family or similar factors are wrong.
28. The national government should guarantee that all adult citizens, except for criminals and the insane, should have the right to vote.
29. Joseph McCarthy was probably the most dangerous man in American public life during the fifteen years following the Second World War.
30. There are no significant differences in intellectual, moral or civilizing capacity among human races and ethnic types.
31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing.
32. Everyone is entitled to political and social rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
33. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and expression.
34. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
35. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.
36. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security.
37. Everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work.
38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions.
39. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

A FULL-BLOWN LIBERAL WILL mark every one, or very nearly every one, of these thirty-nine sentences, Agree. A convinced conservative will mark many or most of them, a reactionary all or nearly all of them, Disagree. By giving this test to a variety of groups, I have confirmed experimentally—what is obvious enough from ordinary discourse—that the result is seldom an even balance between Agree and Disagree. The correlations are especially stable for individuals who are prepared to identify themselves unequivocally as either “liberal” or “reactionary”: such self-defined liberals almost never drop below 85 percent of Agree answers, or self-defined reactionaries below 85 percent of Disagree; a perfect 100 percent is common. Certain types of self-styled conservatives yield almost as high a Disagree percentage as the admitted reactionaries. The answers of those who regard themselves as “moderate conservatives” or “traditional conservatives” and of the rather small number of persons who pretend to no general opinions about public matters show considerably more variation. But in general the responses to this list of thirty-nine sentences indicate that a liberal line can be drawn somewhere—even if not exactly along this salient—and that most persons fall fairly definitely (though not in equal numbers) on one side of it or the other.

These sentences were not devised arbitrarily. Many of them are taken directly or adapted from the writings of well-known liberals, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, or the liberal questionnaires that have been put out in recent years by the American Civil Liberties Union. The last eight are quoted verbatim from the United Nations’ “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” adopted in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly.

Labels: , ,

190 Comments:

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 4:26 PM  

Please upvote Voxiversity at the Donald -- repost hours from now if needed from BitChute.

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/996lxf/voxiversity_the_madness_of_jordan_peterson_clean/

The mad lads are downvoting without watching, of course.

Let's see if it can get traction!

Blogger Elijah August 21, 2018 4:33 PM  

i am a reactionary. i disagreed with more than 85%. like the man says... i'm not a white supremacist, but my sons are!!

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 4:33 PM  

I scored 2 questions yes...what does that make me?

Blogger Zaklog the Great August 21, 2018 4:36 PM  

Guy level responses without a great deal of analysis: 12 agrees.

I hope this doesn’t make me such a soft namby-pamby around here that I get kicked off.

Blogger Warunicorn August 21, 2018 4:42 PM  

Some of these are hilarious, like number 29 (Joseph McCarty was right) and number 30 (yeah...because Africa is such a fine, upstanding continent full of rocket scientists).

The fact they are taken from liberal sources tells me everything I need to know.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 4:45 PM  

Sorry for off-topic, just saw this was a brand new post. The downvoting teenage JP lovers are angry about this post that I made with Voxiversity.

We will have to attack again tomorrow. All we need is to change 10 minds with that video and it's 10 more that will be against him on The Donald.

The kind of crap we're up against:

https://i.imgur.com/mD9dAbU.png

Blogger James Dixon August 21, 2018 4:45 PM  

Let's see. Yes to a total of three. Numbers 2, 18, and 24. Note carefully the difference between 2 and 33/34, that negotiate doesn't specify what you're negotiating, and that 24 doesn't specify much of anything expect that Congress can always be a threat to freedom.

There are several others I wouldn't reply no to, but definitely wouldn't say yes.

Blogger VD August 21, 2018 4:48 PM  

I said yes to three myself. But I am not a conservative.

Blogger exfarmkid August 21, 2018 4:50 PM  

Considered every statement and disagreed with every. freaking. one.

This may help explain why I sucked as a MN Republican precinct chair.

Blogger Jeff aka Orville August 21, 2018 4:52 PM  

51% prog, but in the face of an attack on my tribe, I could easily suspend my support for many of these questions.
For instance, in the threatened scenario, I could easily support Donald Trump suspending the Constitution, and using emperor-like powers to restore order.

Blogger Zaklog the Great August 21, 2018 4:53 PM  

Ack! *Gut level.

Blogger Mad Dok Rob August 21, 2018 5:02 PM  

3 Yes.

Then again, I am all for throwing Communists and Priests that defile the Holy Church with their antics from helicopters.

Pinochet did nothing wrong.

Blogger The Deplorable Podunk Ken Ramsey August 21, 2018 5:05 PM  

I had 4 A's the rest D's. For the first time, I'm proud to be a D-student!

Blogger Groffin August 21, 2018 5:06 PM  

Okay, this list is by-and-large a good litmus test, but there are definitely at least a few questions that were posed in either blind factionism or were too tied to the climate of the times. Three examples of what I mean:
18) “We should be willing to Negotiate with the USSR.” I mean, when the alternatives are a hot war or letting them act unchecked? We quite simply couldn’t afford to forgo diplomacy in talking down the threat the Second World nations posed, that just reality, I can’t think of any intelligent person who would contest that.
24. “Congressional Investigative Committees are dangerous institutions.” Maybe not in the early 20th Century when the watchmen could be reasonably assumed to be patriots, but in 2018? With Mueller and McCabe and those clowns still running around? There is no rational way for a right winger not to agree in the present.
14 “Colonialism and Imperialism are bad.” I mean, you yourself Vox, and most serious Alt-Right thinkers have all said as much, multiple times with multiple illustrated pragmatic reasons.
And yes I get it; “Even back when it first came out no one was supposed to answer blanket yes or no,” and “It’s simply a measure of general political attitudes.”
I get that, and I agree that it is useful to judge how values have shifted in the last half-Century. My contention is merely that, in at least some of the points of contention, the value shift is less because “Right-wingers have all been conditioned to be unconscious leftists” and more “Right-wingers have learned the flaw in old dogma/currently find themselves on the wrong-end of the institutions and have adapted accordingly”

Blogger allyn71 August 21, 2018 5:06 PM  

Wish I would have taken this circa 2004 to have to compare against today. Many of the questions I would have given more thought and possibly agreed with not that long ago. Today I was steadily across the "reactionary" threshold.

Blogger Aquila Aquilonis August 21, 2018 5:12 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 5:15 PM  

@15 Yes. I would probably have agreed with 40% of them ten years ago...But as Keynes said, when the facts change, so do my opinions...

Blogger HoosierHillbilly August 21, 2018 5:20 PM  

#2, #20, #24. Sure, those points are Agree.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 5:28 PM  

#9 and #20.

Vox, I am curious of yours.

I chose #9 because the Founders did, and it included "foreigners". It may be wrong to do it most of the time, and must have restrictions, but it should be there in case.

Blogger Servant of the Chief August 21, 2018 5:29 PM  

I got 11 agree. Clearly I am not being reactionary enough.

Blogger John Best August 21, 2018 5:30 PM  

I agreed with 4 of the sentences. The imperialism is the big thing I have changed on. It used to think the British Empire was a good thing, now I think it was a terrible thing and shouldn't have happened.

Blogger dienw August 21, 2018 5:31 PM  

The absoluteness of the term "Everyone" makes me disagree with almost all the statements; yet, many of these would be present in a Christian society and culture wherein the extended family is restored; such a society would not be socialist, nor would it be Darwinian, laisez faire capitalism: what is desirable is a just society with sound judgement and charity and where the poor are not oppressed; but when and where has this existed? not even ancient Israel under the Law and the prophets did this despite what God repeatedly declared.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 5:32 PM  

@13, Groffin: I wrote a reply and it glitched on me. I was more long winded.

Basically, I compared your analysis to overthinking like I did at a younger age with the "Political Compass" quiz and how the water bottle question was a stupid one.

Then I pointed out: Are you in favor of imperialism at face value? If Vox and all of us had a government, would you be ok with it? Yeah, I would. I am against stupid imperialism, but I am not against it in principle itself.

The problem, of course, is it's **usually** stupid.

Blogger John Best August 21, 2018 5:33 PM  

I am not a Conservative, I am a British Loyalist and Cavalier Tory.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 21, 2018 5:33 PM  

I found myself agreeing with 2, 6 and 20. I guess I'm a reactionary.

Blogger Slagenthor August 21, 2018 5:35 PM  

Four yes, here...I feel ashamed and the need to do penance.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 5:35 PM  

@21, John Best: "I agreed with 4 of the sentences. The imperialism is the big thing I have changed on. It used to think the British Empire was a good thing, now I think it was a terrible thing and shouldn't have happened. "

Really? Is South Africa and Rhodesia worse off (pre-whites-being-killed) than it was in the past?

I am not making a distinction between stupid imperialism and smart(er) imperialism, I am looking at it from the perspective of, if Vox is King and we are his counsel, would we be ok with imperialism if it was smart to do so?

I think we would say "yes". It is just normally stupid to do so. Unintended consequences, ulterior motives, etc. at work.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 5:36 PM  

I am curious if Vox would comment on imperialism or any other trends in here. I know that there are less of us picking free speech as a value than we would have two years ago.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 21, 2018 5:38 PM  

Groffin wrote:24. “Congressional Investigative Committees are dangerous institutions.” Maybe not in the early 20th Century when the watchmen could be reasonably assumed to be patriots, but in 2018? With Mueller and McCabe and those clowns still running around? There is no rational way for a right winger not to agree in the present.

A congressional committee could indict and impeach Mueller, McCabe and the rest of their insane clown posse.

John Best wrote:It used to think the British Empire was a good thing, now I think it was a terrible thing and shouldn't have happened.

It has certainly done terrible damage to England.

Blogger Damelon Brinn August 21, 2018 5:42 PM  

Yes on 2, 18, 24. You can see the context of the time, when "negotiating" with Communists was generally understood to mean "capitulating." But now, why not negotiate with North Korea or anyone else, as long as we're doing it in our own national interest.

Blogger tz August 21, 2018 5:45 PM  

I had more agrees but mostly toward the theoretical and libertarian. Some of the questions might be like "Is peace better than war" - in 90% of the cases, but not when your liberty is threatened. Beyond that, many other things are like "do something about terrorism" which in 2018 we have Muslim terrorists in the Vikings Stadium shouting Allu Akbar today, the TSA where grannys have to have their daipers inspected, the other aspects of the NSA panopticon PATRIOT act, etc.

For those where I would have been otherwise liberal on, it is mostly the pragmatc or implementation that I wouldn't trust.

How many would you disagree with if it meant Hillary, Pelosi, Schumer, and Ruth Baider Ginsberg got to define what they meant and how to enforce it.

Yet it is a good if imperfect tool.

I will note there were no questions about homosexuality, abortion, divorce, etc. which I think would be far more decisive.

Gays have a right to F*** in public, especially at a parade.
Pulling a baby out feet first and crushing its skull before its fully born is justified if it is unwanted.
Divorce for any reason and the man is always at fault.
Women don't lie about rape.
Everyone is entitled to use the restroom or locker room they identify with.

For some reason I've seen articles going back to Roy Moore, and that exemplifies the problem. Unsubstantiatied allegations without due process apparently disqualified him when a rabid liberal force gay marriage on Christians and murder babies in the womb up to the point of birth was the known alternative.

Will they also say: I think Hitler should have been allowed to dominate Europe and murder every last Jew there because Winston Churchill was a nasty drunkard and unfit to be Prime Minister and the USA shouldn't have done the lend-lease and entered the war helping this awful man.

Those kind of principles are a luxury of peace time, and beyone the civil war, I never hear the cuckservatives attacking and demanding on "principle" the dismantling of the TSA and the PATRIOT Act etc.

Or even "save the undocumented income! #AbolishIRS".

Blogger Teleros August 21, 2018 5:45 PM  

On a simple agree/disagree basis that assumes no unusual measures or lawyerly reading of the positions I'm 37/39 reactionary (10 & 18 being the exceptions), but my inner pedant really doesn't like some of the others...

2. Yes - but "entitled to opinion" =/= "entitled to voice it noisily".
5. Yes - torture is almost always wrong (and ineffective to boot). Physical terror... does a bayonet charge count? Point is, terror can *save* lives and such.
9. Yes - for national defence alone.
10. Yes - but a duty to mankind =/= gibs, it can mean tough love etc too.
18. Yes - but negotiating =/= compromising.
20. Yes - but let's not go overboard in ever-smaller divisions, or leave a colony to let it become (eg) a Soviet satellite state instead.
24. Yes - except for the "must be curbed" bit. Curbing a committee is what you do when it misbehaves.
31. Yes - but let's be realistic & pragmatic, and recognise that there will always be a minimum level we want due to the inability to foresee disasters etc.
33. Yes - except for expression. This is why I dislike overly broad questions, or no half and half response option.
34. See previous.

Still, even at my most pedantic I'm 87% reactionary :P .

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 21, 2018 5:45 PM  

The Gray Man wrote:I am against stupid imperialism, but I am not against it in principle itself.


How many nations actually survive their imperial phase?
Mongols?
Israel?
Rome?
Greece?
France?
England?
No nation has ever recovered from the Empire Disease as a homogenous nation.


Ever.

Blogger MLGunner August 21, 2018 5:45 PM  

I am not sure if this will "disqualify" me from Vox's Dread Legion or not, but I seem to be a liberal, with 21 "wrong answers". It wouldn't surprise me that anyone with a libertarian or "freedom" ideology would tend more toward more freedom for individuals, and less for government control.
For me, the simple test is:
1. Does the question interfere with my Life, liberty or property?
2. Is it right for me to initiate violent action against people who are not violent against me?
The former test question is based on the fact that any answer (agree or disagree) that would need a "law" or government to make it work, would initiate deadly force (costumed men with guns and "authority") to "enforce" it.
For #1 example: disagreeing with #21 would probably interfere with my personal right to bow and pray and agreeing with #31 would interfere with my right to arm myself.
For #2 example: Agreeing with #8 would initiate violence against people who don't want to have their income stolen, while disagreeing with #12 would initiate violence against people with unpopular opinions who want to get together, peacefully.
The only rational way to answer questions like this is to consider the personal consequences.

Blogger dtungsten August 21, 2018 5:47 PM  

I said agree to ~38% of it just now. I would have been closer to 50/50 a couple years ago. Not to sound like a secret king, but I don't seem to think like normal people. This sort of thing seems to happen a lot.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 5:52 PM  

@ 33 Snidely -

I know. The British Empire didn't have to fall so badly. It also wasn't without its faults.

It also gave us Australia, New Zealand, America, and more.

I am not defending it as a pro-war person, but in a theoretical "it isn't bad on it's face, it is just stupid". As I said, I am interested in Vox commenting on it for any insight.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 21, 2018 5:54 PM  

MLGunner wrote:The former test question is based on the fact that any answer (agree or disagree) that would need a "law" or government to make it work, would initiate deadly force (costumed men with guns and "authority") to "enforce" it.
You Libertarians are so cute. You think words alone can make other people adhere to your standards when they could profit mightily by violating them.

Come back when you've grown up. Or stopped being a narcissist. Either way.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume August 21, 2018 5:55 PM  

What struck me was how many Leftists today would disagree with a lot of those statements but because the Overton Window has moved so far in more than one direction:

#1: Now black students should get their own safe spaces on colleges, free of whites and their privilege.

#2: If you have too much privilege, you aren't entitled to an opinion.

#4: Hahahahahahaha "Bake that cake!"

#12: Unless you're a College Republican, then "No Assembly for you!" and you can't listen to Ann Coulter make a speech.

#21: See #4

#23: Well, except Hate Speech

#26: Except in the case of professors who are conservative or those who point out inconvenient scientific facts. Or who wear T-shirts with chicks on them.

#27: Unless there are too many whites

#'s 33 & 34: See #4. Again.



Blogger John Best August 21, 2018 6:00 PM  

@27. Well currently my nation is being invaded by 15,000,000 not-British people, globalist corporations and subverted by traitors, this is the exact same thing which happened to Africa and Asia. It ruined their nations and it is ruining my nation. That's my thinking one it, every people should have a kingdom which belongs to them, they shouldn't be globalized, colonized and subverted.

The Rhodesians were British people, they broke from the British state and were defeated in by the native African tribes with the support of the Chinese, Russians, Americans and British state. They weren't a people, they were a state trying to maintain itself. I am very proud of what my people did in Rhodesia though, that they were able to hold on for so long and were very close to be able to build their own nation if they had won the Bush war. However the globalists crushed them, like the globalists are doing to my nation now.

South Africa again is a state not a nation, the Afrikaner are a people and should have their own nation for themselves. So should the Zulu, Xhose and Coloured's, South Africa will break part. I hope the Afrikaner survive and fight to maintain themselves, if not they will be destroyed.

What would be smart imperialism? Like the Ulster Plantation? That was a strategic success for Britain and the Ulster-Scottish now have their own nation, but the are locked in a low level conflict with the Irish, which from time to time becomes a problem. In the end the Loyalists will have to drive the Celtic Irish out of 6 countries. So even smart imperialism causes problems.

Blogger tublecane August 21, 2018 6:01 PM  

@14- You have it backwards, there. Mueller, McCabe, etc. are the Permanent Government. Congressional investigations can be used against them. Much like McCarthy tried to do to the State Department and Army.

Blogger Teleros August 21, 2018 6:03 PM  

John Best wrote:I agreed with 4 of the sentences. The imperialism is the big thing I have changed on. It used to think the British Empire was a good thing, now I think it was a terrible thing and shouldn't have happened.

A lot depends on the kind of imperialism / colonialism. Rhodesia / South Africa I disapprove of because... well look. On the other hand, India benefited from the transmission of British ideals, Spain put an end to the Aztec religion, and the USA wouldn't exist were it not for colonialism. The British Empire was also very important as a bulwark against far nastier imperialist regimes (hi France, Germany, Japan et al) - those conquered taxpayers in India might have been forced to pay taxes, but at least they helped fund Napoleon's defeat.

That said, I sure wouldn't want to see anyone going off conquering vast swathes of Africa again, and I think we all here know why inviting your new subjects back to your homeland is a very bad idea. However, if the UK were to peacefully buy land, depopulate it (eg cash for moving out) and populate it with Brits etc... that's colonialism all right, but it's not at the point of a gun or anything, so what's the harm?

The Gray Man wrote:I am not defending it as a pro-war person, but in a theoretical "it isn't bad on it's face, it is just stupid". As I said, I am interested in Vox commenting on it for any insight.

I think we can draw a few lessons on how to do it right:

1. Subject peoples must never become citizens of your homeland, unless they are so few in number you can genetically assimilate them almost without noticing.
2. Ideally, you should ethnically cleanse the colony of natives and bring your own people in. Compare Australia to Rhodesia.
3. If you are going to rule another nation, do it the British way - ie with minimal interference in their daily lives. Sure, stamp out suttee by all means, but in general a light touch works best.
4. If ruling others, train up friendly native elites to replace you when your rule inevitably ends.

Blogger tublecane August 21, 2018 6:04 PM  

I said this on the other thread, but to repeat myself as I recall the upshot of Suicide of the West was that Westerners had lost the Will to Live and that the liberalism of the day existed to rationalize decline and prefer peace to liberty and strife.

That sounds conservative to me.

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 6:04 PM  

I ignored #2 because it's pointless. How can you stop anyone from having an opinion....Expressing the opinion is a different matter.

Blogger Jeffrey Johnson August 21, 2018 6:06 PM  

I got 5 yeses.

I said yes on 14 because colonialism is destructive to the nation colonized and to the home country.

I said yes on 19. My wife and I are doing the Stefan Molyneux peaceful parenting thing with our daughter. I could easily see my attitude changing when we have multiple kids and they are in the 6 to 7 age range.

I said yes on 20 because all nations have a right to national self determination and the right NOT to be ruled over by foreigners.

I said yes on 24 because congress always goes corrupt and uses commissions to hide their crimes or to go after their enemies.

I said yes to 38 but I'm open to changing my mind on this one too. People have the right to form mutual support organizations and if workers believe that this will help them out then they are free to organize. Also businesses have a right NOT to work with trade unions.

I guess that I really am heavily opposed to liberalism. I'm ready to bring back blasphemy laws and end the charade of "free speech" which is just code meaning: enemies of western civilization have free reign to verbally undermine civilization and Christianity.

Blogger Groffin August 21, 2018 6:06 PM  

1) I think there is no such thing as “Non-stupid Imperialism” everyone’s line originated from where they belong and invading other lands is evil and (inevitable, rightfully) self-destructive. God delineated all nations, stay in your lane.
2) I may be exposing my Blackpill/low-imaginative mindset here, but I don’t give a fuck how life would be like in a hypothetical “best case” situation; the world we live in currently is a Shadow State manipulated Clown World, and I will base my views of the State around that fact.
3) Be honest Jack, a “Dark Legion” staffed government is a fanciful daydream; Vox has made clear he has no intention of ever committing to active, direct politics, and no offense but none of us in the comment section is exactly shaping up to be his “Intellectual Heirs”

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 6:06 PM  

@14, 40 Investigating is one of Congress's powers; it's not dangerous unless Congress is dangerous.

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 6:10 PM  

On #20, I don't agree because when we hand out "rights" to other countries, the upshot is that America starts interfering to enforce those rights. You have a right if you can enforce it yourself, otherwise, forget it...

Blogger Daniel Babylon August 21, 2018 6:13 PM  

28. The national government should guarantee that all adult citizens, except for criminals and the insane, should have the right to vote.
Is there a point to voting besides personal satisfaction? No one person's vote has much power so the outcomes may as well be selected randomly (unless a majority of voters agree on something).

Blogger Groffin August 21, 2018 6:14 PM  

And would you say with a straight face that it isn’t in current times?

Blogger VFM #7634 August 21, 2018 6:14 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger VFM #7634 August 21, 2018 6:17 PM  

The only statements I agreed with were 6, 7, and 9, and even then with caveats.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 6:18 PM  

I hate modern Western public schools as much as the next guy, but what is the alternative to public schools on a national level? Is there any civilized country that doesn't have them?

Homeschooling is great but I don't think you can count on an entire citizenry to effectively home school and modern economies don't need millions of illiterate laborers.

Or are people simply disagreeing with the "everyone" part?

Overall I agreed with 5.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 6:20 PM  

That's 5 sentences, not #5.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 21, 2018 6:26 PM  

Teleros wrote:On the other hand, India benefited from the transmission of British ideals, Spain put an end to the Aztec religion, and the USA wouldn't exist were it not for colonialism.

On the other hand, it has pretty well destroyed England.

Jeffrey Johnson wrote:I said yes on 20 because all nations have a right to national self determination and the right NOT to be ruled over by foreigners.

That was my idea, too. I certainly wouldn't agree with the idea that their right to self determination is any concern of mine. Across all of Africa and perhaps parts of Asia political independence is going to mean - already means - unending cannibalism and horror. Not our circus, not our monkeys, not our problem.

Blogger van helsing August 21, 2018 6:29 PM  

it's a dated list and the left can say a bunch of those have been Ws for them in the rear view mirror for a long time. yes they are riddled with obvious caveats, usually along the lines of cui bono, who-whom, who pays, who's in charge, whose ox is getting gored... the reason we have 2A is #6. issue is... who decides what is tyranny and a revolt... 14. wrong... but depends what resources ya need, I guess. generally a bad idea (stupid, not criminal?), however, as cucks and the converged eventually gain control and voila! reverse colonialism here we come... 22. sure. but peace thru what? weakness? peace is the goal - but not at all costs... 24. agree but... right now other than some personal grandstanding (i'm lookin at you, gowdy doddy)... some congressional investigations arent all bad. cui bono?... 27. agree, quotas are bad. it's also obvious cui bono from quotas. not most of us...9. ambivalent. if none, then government sponsored mercantilism and improvements dont happen, which doesnt bother me. but i can also see it leading in some cases to anarcho-foreign policy where some folks run a private border turnstile, like they do now.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 21, 2018 6:32 PM  

Nikephoros II Phokas wrote:I hate modern Western public schools as much as the next guy, but what is the alternative to public schools on a national level? Is there any civilized country that doesn't have them?

The US had no public schools, as we understand the term today, until the great waves of immigration around the time of the Civil War. The Founding Fathers were home schooled.

Nikephoros II Phokas wrote:Homeschooling is great but I don't think you can count on an entire citizenry to effectively home school and modern economies don't need millions of illiterate laborers.

Half the citizens are below average. They can train their below average sprogs to do what they can do. Their above average sprogs can learn more, and will.

People who have never home schooled believe it's hard, and takes talent or brains or something. That's nonsense. It just takes being a parent.

Blogger CM August 21, 2018 6:32 PM  

Ever

I'd hazard Japan, but British control was light at the sunset of her empire and Japan did not come away unscarred, just still homogenous.

Blogger EIA August 21, 2018 6:34 PM  

A lot of these questions are posed as moral absolutes. On that basis, I will usually say "disagree". On the other hand, many of them fall in the category of "it depends", "it would be nice if we could, but we may not be able" or "as a general rule, with exceptions for bad behavior or proven bad outcomes".

Blogger CM August 21, 2018 6:38 PM  

hate modern Western public schools as much as the next guy, but what is the alternative to public schools on a national level? Is there any civilized country that doesn't have them?

A peanut allergy kid's parents have a right to send their kid to PS and in so doing, force all parents to agree to not sending kids to school with PBJ.

A child with an autoimmune illness can’t be vaccinated but has a right to PS and all the other kids are now forced to be fully vaccinated.

I have an issue with the mentality of "right to public school" if it means forcing others to bend over backwards to keep your kid alive. There are alternatives to education if it is that important to you. If you ask and the community willingly agrees to acvommodate you, you should be grateful for their compassion. Not tyrannical in your demand for their inconvenience.

Blogger Dave August 21, 2018 6:41 PM  

Daniel Babylon wrote:28. The national government should guarantee that all adult citizens, except for criminals and the insane, should have the right to vote.

Is there a point to voting besides personal satisfaction? No one person's vote has much power so the outcomes may as well be selected randomly (unless a majority of voters agree on something).


You should ask President Trump is there is a point to voting.

Blogger MLGunner August 21, 2018 6:42 PM  

@37 "You Libertarians are so cute."
Snidely, I didn't know you cared. But sorry, I don't swing "that" way.
Not a member of the "Libertarian Party", they are a bunch of irrational idiots.
But you are showing an equally irrational response.
All of those questions are personal, so the only rational response is a personal one:
"2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion."
In considering that, the only real question is:
"Are you entitled to your own opinion?"
NOT
"Is Abdul the terrorist entitled to his own opinion."
Because Abdul could possibly be enforcing that question, not you. It's quite possible that "Abdul" could be sporting a name like "Smith", and be quite reactionary, but just doesn't agree with YOUR particular shading of "opinion" to his liking.
As for the rest:
The ONLY good and perfect government is the one the Almighty God would run, personally.
The rest are at the very best a necessary evil, and at worst the rule of Satan over the dead.

Blogger Mark Stoval August 21, 2018 6:45 PM  

A nation is a community of people who share a common language, culture, values, traditions, ethnicity, descent, and history.

A State or nation-state is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular, it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue by coercion.

One should not have to give these definitions as a prelude to my take on the 39 questions, but I think we do these days.

I think the "nation" is really a "tribe", and I favor the tribe governing itself in whatever fashion best suits its members. It is after all a large extended family.

I hate the State. I hate the State with a passion that goes beyond expressing it in words. The national government of the State called the USA should be so small and weak that it just barely exists at all --- at the most. I would prefer it did not even exist.

So, the test I would give is smaller. Do you hate the State?


Blogger Miguel August 21, 2018 6:46 PM  

Said yes to 4. Im pretty much the New General Franco.

Blogger CM August 21, 2018 6:50 PM  

I agreed with 10. I'm a bad reactionary.

Blogger Bad Attitude August 21, 2018 6:59 PM  

I guess I'm a soft-headed liberal. I agreed with 12 of the statements, primarily because I believe in free speech - even for idiots and those with whom I disagree.

Blogger DraveckysHumerus August 21, 2018 6:59 PM  

Some of you disagreed that university quotas based on demographic attributes are wrong? Even in respect of maths, hard sciences and chemical or electrical engineering? So much for the role of merit in future society.

Blogger Lance E August 21, 2018 7:00 PM  

#9 is interesting because I'd expect both liberals and reactionaries to support it, but for different reasons. Liberals would support it because of social contract theory; reactionaries would support it on the basis of private government and the sovereign's de facto ownership of all property. I'd expect only conservatives and "classical" liberals to disagree.

Blogger haus frau August 21, 2018 7:03 PM  

I agreed with 6 of them,but then im female.

Blogger James Dixon August 21, 2018 7:07 PM  

> eah, I would. I am against stupid imperialism, but I am not against it in principle itself....
The problem, of course, is it's **usually** stupid.

That's the problem with many of the questions that I wouldn't say either yes or no to.

Blogger The Gray Man August 21, 2018 7:08 PM  

Mark Stoval,

You gotta move past hating the State. That's how many of us ended up here. Yes, it's evil, but don't let libertarianism keep you in the dark.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 21, 2018 7:15 PM  

Bad Attitude wrote:I agreed with 12 of the statements, primarily because I believe in free speech - even for idiots and those with whom I disagree.

Free speech has always been a false principle that the satanists pushed while it covered their subversion. The satanic Left was for it until they felt they had control, but now they are absolutely against it.

In a homogeneous Christian nation, free speech within the bounds of laws against treason and blasphemy won't be an issue.

DraveckysHumerus wrote:Some of you disagreed that university quotas based on demographic attributes are wrong?

A quota of zero is still a quota. I am against ever allowing a mohammedan into our nation or our schools. Any Leftist who is allowed to live should never be allowed an education. Our nation is for us, not for them, whoever ``they'' may be. So, yes, quotas.

Let the other nations have their own countries and their own schools. Let a thousand Wakandas bloom!

Blogger dtbb August 21, 2018 7:17 PM  

Happy 50th Vox!

Blogger saintCrispee August 21, 2018 7:18 PM  

I disagreed with 4 of them.

The majority of them are commonsense expressions of liberty and good citizenship.

Blogger Mark Stoval August 21, 2018 7:20 PM  

@70

As I understand it, many here were "libertarians" of the CATO or "Libertarian Party" variety.

The followers of Hans-Hermann Hoppe or Murray N. Rothbard are not left libertarians. So, no need to worry about me. Thanks for the comment anyway, I know you meant well.

All I will say today it that almost every evil that is mentioned in posts by Vox Day or in the comments section of his posts is rooted in the nation-State. Sure, some idiots here will yell that the State is really people but so was the Mafia. The State draws in the evil ones. It is Satan's tool.

Now, I voted for Trump in self-defense. Obviously Trump is much better than Clinton. We have a State and I don't ignore it.

Blogger Damelon Brinn August 21, 2018 7:28 PM  

What struck me was how many Leftists today would disagree with a lot of those statements

They would claim to agree with them, but act differently in practice. On 33/34, for instance, they would claim to support everyone's right to express himself. But if you asked about hate speech, they would say of course that doesn't apply to hate speech, because everyone they know knows that's different.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 7:37 PM  

"modern economies don't need millions of illiterate laborers."

The public school system doesn't produce literacy, so...

"Some of you disagreed that university quotas based on demographic attributes are wrong? Even in respect of maths, hard sciences and chemical or electrical engineering? So much for the role of merit in future society."

My bad for quietly wanting to disallow moslems, atheists, communists, socialists, freaks, perverts, and foreigners into our institutions. Next time I'll remember to tell them up front that they can kindly f*** off.

Even beyond that, are you serious? Intelligence is a demographic attribute.

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 7:38 PM  

I guess I'm a soft-headed liberal. I agreed with 12 of the statements, primarily because I believe in free speech - even for idiots and those with whom I disagree.
Free speech, including or excluding pornography? Including or excluding speech that advocates destruction of the ethnic majority, its nation, or its religion? Including or excluding the right of organizations to exclude or punish speakers who deviate from the preferred narrative?
You see the problem, right?

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 7:39 PM  

(Cont.) Where the heck are you getting meritocracy in your university without applying demographic metrics, Draveckys? Test scores from their local schools? Better start practicing your Mandarin and Cantonese now.

Blogger My Shield Is Disgust August 21, 2018 7:41 PM  

Thank you, Dark Lord, for posting this. I shall use it to further purge whatever inner heresy remains in me.

THE EMPEROR PROTECTS

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 7:47 PM  

@66 The statement says that all quota systems are wrong...Clearly ridiculous in the case of religious institutions and in a host of other cases. If the statement said that preferences may not be given based on racial or cultural factors, I might agree, but the Universities would cheat anyway, as we have seen.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 7:47 PM  

"Half the citizens are below average. They can train their below average sprogs to do what they can do. Their above average sprogs can learn more, and will.

People who have never home schooled believe it's hard, and takes talent or brains or something. That's nonsense. It just takes being a parent."

No, I just realize that modern economies have less and less need for the below average, and that teaching your kid to do what you do doesn't work when your job will be done by a robot in 20 years.

I didn't say it was hard. I said I don't trust an entire society, here in real world modern white America, to homeschool effectively. You can't even count on many modern parents not to get high on opiates around their kids. That's not even including the Hispanics and blacks.

And I'd rather not leave it up to chance whether Denny's waitresses, HR secretaries, and Huffington Post columnists can create the next generation of engineers necessary to win an arms race with 1.3+ billion Chinese and their tiger moms.

"Free public school" doesn't have to mean a massive brainwashing compound with 30+ kids per class. It could just be an old-school school house with 10 kids and a teacher from the neighborhood. Or limit it to certain areas, income groups, etc. Just for the kids whose parents are too poor, stupid, non-existent, etc. for them to be effectively homeschooled.

I don't think every kid should go to public school, I just think every kid should have access to a basic education, regardless of who his parents are.

That's a lot better than having to deal with them when they're unemployable when they get older.

Blogger Desdichado August 21, 2018 7:50 PM  

I've always told people that think I'm some crazy reactionary that I'm a lot more moderate than they think. They're perspective and context is just too skewed to know better.

But now we can actually quantify it! This is a really great find

Blogger The Greay Man August 21, 2018 7:51 PM  

@ 60 Dave:

You can acknowledge the mathematical insignificance of one vote while also acknowledging that more votes = better shot at winning.

I don't discourage anyone from voting, but I keep my "I don't need to vote" to myself.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 7:53 PM  

"I have an issue with the mentality of "right to public school" if it means forcing others to bend over backwards to keep your kid alive. There are alternatives to education if it is that important to you. If you ask and the community willingly agrees to acvommodate you, you should be grateful for their compassion. Not tyrannical in your demand for their inconvenience."

I agree with this. Like I said above, I only think all kids should have access to a basic education. And not for feelz, but for the good of the rest of society.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 7:59 PM  

"I don't think every kid should go to public school, I just think every kid should have access to a basic education, regardless of who his parents are."

Believe it or not, kids will kind of do that on their own. The ones capable of more will actually educate themselves to within a few points of where they would have been anyway, assuming information is at least somewhat available.

Blogger DraveckysHumerus August 21, 2018 8:02 PM  

@71
@76

FWIW zero is a placeholder meaning no value. Thus zero cannot constitute a quota because quota requires a value by definition.

Accepting quota introduces cronyism and so inevitably the children of "elites" (cough) will find a way into university on pretextual quota grounds, e.g., dyslexia, myopia, pharmacopia, childhood butt lice, etc. Before the jews showed up it was the wasps who played the quota game in the form of legacy with the result some truly destructive dumbarses secured entry and the subsequent "leadership" which has led us to our present condition.

Keep the outsiders out but university selection in the future must be competitive on merit alone. No effing crony selections.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 8:10 PM  

"Keep the outsiders out"

If you want to do it your way, still doable by demographic quota. In this case a "full whitelist" variety, such as "x class must have 24 students of y demographic" in which there are 24 seats in said class, ensuring none of z foreign demographic get in.

That's usually how quotas are used to ensure a "0 quota" for something.

Blogger S. Kreusler August 21, 2018 8:12 PM  

I can see the modern day left receiving less-than-perfect marks. 27. And answering yes to question 1 means the end of "POC and womyn only safe spaces"

Blogger seeingsights August 21, 2018 8:21 PM  

James Burnham's Suicide of the West is a great work of political theory. Jonah Goldberg is not fit to stand in Burnham's shadow.
An interesting criticism of Burnham's I've seen--which come from the Right--is that Burnham was the intellectual founder of neo-conservatism.
My answer to that is yes and no. Burnham was an anti-Communist theorist (see his book The Coming Defeat of Communism). He was a Cold Warrior. But we will never know what his foreign policy views would be in a post Cold War world. He was not Jewish. I never thought of him as an Israel Firster.

Blogger James Dixon August 21, 2018 8:23 PM  

> I don't think every kid should go to public school, I just think every kid should have access to a basic education, regardless of who his parents are.

Then you're welcome to pay for it. Don't try forcing the rest of us to do so.

Now, others have asked for Vox's analysis of the questions. I'm not Vox and don't presume to speak for him, but in the interest of discussion, here are my answers and the general reasons.

1. No. Free association anyone?

2. Yes. Voicing or acting on that opinion is conditional.

3. No. No one has a right to another's wallet. Education costs money.

4. No. See number 1 above.

5. No. Torture? Stupid, probably, but not necessarily wrong. Terror? The whole point of war is to terrorize you opposition.

6. No. A good dictatorship may be better than a bad democracy. Generally yes, but it's conditional, and they stated it as an absolute.

7. No. It's probably a good idea. It's not a duty.

8. No. Insert a bout of maniacal laughter here. As I noted in an earlier thread, the fairest form of taxation would be a very low tax on every financial transation with a state created or sanctioned entity, as the state is responsible for the currency.

9. No. Legal, yes. Moral, no.

10. No. Not even Christianity calls for such.

11. Double the laughter of number 8.

12. No. Any interference? By anyone? I'm not going to allow Antifa to assemble on my property.

13. Absolutely not. This is just a subset of number 10 and like number 3 is an attempt to stake a claim on another's wallet.

14. No. As someone else noted earlier, generally stupid, but not necessarily wrong.

15. No. See number 1.

16. No. More laughter. Total and complete BS.

17. No. See #2. They have a right to their opinion. Expressing it is conditional.

18. Terms of surrender are a negotiation, so yes.

19. Stated by someone without children. No. I remember what I was like as a child.

20. So the south had the right to secede after all? I didn't think so. Why should I support a right that would never be granted to me?

21. No. Some beliefs are obviously wrong and/or evil and do not deserve respect.

22. No. At what cost? "Gentlemen may cry Peace, Peace, but there is no peace. The war is actually begun."

23. No. Again, no conditions are set, and freedom of speech is conditional.

24. Yes. "No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session."

25. See number 3.

26. No. For private universities, that's entirely a matter for the individual university to decide and not a matter of public concern. For public universities and below, no.

27. No. See my last question for number 20.

28. No. There is no right to vote, nor should there be. Voting has always been conditional, and it should be earned.

29. More laughter. No.

30. Double the laughter of number 11. No.

31. No. Note this would eventually mean the end of the second amendment.

32. No. The statement is much to broad to be even generally true.

33. No. Freedom of thought and conscience? Yes. Expression? No. That's conditional.

34. No. See number 33.

35. No. Again, did the south had a right to secede? Force is the basis of the authority of government. Pretending otherwise is foolish.

36. No. Again, no one has a right to another's wallet.

37. No. You have no "right" to any pay for work outside of what you can negotiate.

38. Is union membership mandatory, as it is in many areas? Then no. Otherwise I'd be willing to grant this one under free association.

39. No. See number 3.

Dissect to your heart's content.

Blogger c0pperheaded August 21, 2018 8:23 PM  

DraveckysHumerous is a good name

Blogger seeingsights August 21, 2018 8:29 PM  

Burnham also wrote The Mangerial Revolution. I read that book around 25 years ago, and I take him as saying that governments were being run by unelected individuals and organizations. We call that the Deep State nowadays.
I've seen people say that Burnham was advocating that.
That is NOT the impression I got. His view was like, "This is the way things are. If you don't recognize that, you are in lala land. Deal with it."

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 8:34 PM  

@Azure:

I'm still waiting on someone to name some civilized countries that don't have public schools.

Japan? Highly intelligent, industrious, and homogeneous people with a notoriously difficult written language. 90%+ public school enrollment.

That is HIGHER than the United States.

Why?

If public schools are not a good idea on a national level, why does every single developed nation on Earth have them, from the most globalist to the most nationalist?

Blogger Lazarus August 21, 2018 8:38 PM  

Muslim triumphalism at Vikings stadium.

Bad Karma?

https://www.wnd.com/2018/08/muslims-chant-allahu-akbar-at-vikings-stadium-2/

Blogger Sherwood family August 21, 2018 8:46 PM  

Jeffrey Johnson, where did you go? You disappeared for a while. I used to read your blog and then one day...gone.

Blogger James Dixon August 21, 2018 8:46 PM  

> If public schools are not a good idea on a national level,

A good idea does not a right make. The fact that a educating the public is good public policy doesn't give anyone the automatic right to an education at the public's expense.

Blogger Damelon Brinn August 21, 2018 8:54 PM  

I said I don't trust an entire society, here in real world modern white America, to homeschool effectively.

I'll take that over trusting it to a government school system created by some of the worst elements of that same society.

Blogger Salt August 21, 2018 8:55 PM  

38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions.

Yeah, okay, but no business etc is required to answer to said union. Go f*** yourself.

Blogger Salt August 21, 2018 8:57 PM  

31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing.

Not if it involves taking my guns. Go f*** yourself.

Blogger S1AL August 21, 2018 8:57 PM  

James Dixon, re: point 10 - Galatians 6:10

That's an example of why most of these are "No, except in very specific circumstances"... In my case.. Which sounds about right.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother August 21, 2018 9:00 PM  

Can the Good and Hard award stand shoulder to shoulder with Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome?

https://twitter.com/jay_stang/status/1032068791155523585?s=19

Blogger Damelon Brinn August 21, 2018 9:02 PM  

I'm still waiting on someone to name some civilized countries that don't have public schools.

You may be waiting a long time. "Everyone else is doing it" isn't an argument that holds much sway around here. We could probably name some countries whose public schools aren't *keeping* them very civilized, though.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 9:05 PM  

"A good idea does not a right make. The fact that a educating the public is good public policy doesn't give anyone the automatic right to an education at the public's expense."

The education levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly effects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments.

But let's disband the military, ICE, and the fire department too so we can save a little money on our taxes.

Blogger S1AL August 21, 2018 9:06 PM  

Re: civilized nations and public schools - cart before the horse. Schools are a result of civilization. Having been corrupted, they will be replaced.

Blogger Groffin August 21, 2018 9:12 PM  

Name a developed nation in the current year that doesn’t have some degree of gun control, or a series of government-funded feminist university studies. For fuck’s sake man, an uneducated child could tear apart this weakass “appeal to conformity” fallacy.

What’s good for Japan isn’t necessarily good for us, and demonstrably isn’t (think we didn’t notice how you refuse to actually address the rate of failure of the US public school system retard? 16+% dropout rate and entrenched Teachers’ Union abuse doesn’t look good for your supposed “cure for unqualified future workers”)

You wanna know why Public Schools are standard? Because during the Gilded Age, Industrial robber barons and career political-machinists lobbied to copy the Prussian model because they saw it as an effective means of corralling and conditioning the still-young generations into being Pavlovian drones primed for the assembly line and habit-voting, then they exported the perfected model in the 20th Century year’s of American hegemon. Government provided education is a racket meant to browbeat children into placidity and snuff out their potential for inquisitiveness and self-sufficiency as adults.

youtube.com/watch?v=HZp7eVJNJuw

Fuck the Prussian proto-military-industrial system’s factory-model for obedience, and fuck you to death with a spiked cudgel on the public square for advocating the world keep submitting to this poison.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume August 21, 2018 9:12 PM  

@103

"The education levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly effects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments."

True-but it doesn't necessarily work in the direction you are thinking. The USA's public schools are directly contributing to the dearth of individuals qualified to think critically and take up the mantle of Citizen.

Homeschool or die. It's not just for families any more.

Blogger Sherwood family August 21, 2018 9:15 PM  

The United States became a civilized country long before it had a system of government mandated education publicly funded by the tax payer. From the moment colonists set foot on the continent until the mid-1800's the United States had a series of home schools, community supported schools, and locally funded institutions of higher education. If you have ever seen what was required to be certified as an 8th grade graduate from those days you will know that the level of education was considerably higher. Let's not confuse the good of education with the need for it to be state controlled and tax payer funded.

The goal of public, taxpayer supported education, was that it would raise the general level of discourse, etc. What it did was the opposite, it dumbed down education until we have illiterates graduating from high school. Simple ceasing to publicly fund education and closing down government schools would do more to improve education in the U.S. than almost anything I can think of. In part, because it would force the burden of decision making about education back onto the shoulders of the parents where it belongs instead of letting them shift such decision making to the state.

Blogger Sam Sutherland August 21, 2018 9:16 PM  

Four Agrees for me:

9 If the government needs your land to build a railroad for troop transportation or build a defensive barrier, they have every legal and moral right to take your land. Compensation optional.

17 Who would I have to laugh at if communists couldn't express themselves?

20 Every nation has the right to rule itself, even if they're all morons. Vive Le Quebec Libre!

24 Who watches the watchers?

So, I'm in favour of national autonomy, even for morons, but at the same time I can't quite say that colonialism and imperialism are always wrong. The Roman Empire brought peace to the world, after all. Are there any moral/ethical arguments for why a more civilized nation shouldn't impose its vision of civilization on a less civilized territory? I can only think of practical arguments for and against such actions.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 9:26 PM  

"What’s good for Japan isn’t necessarily good for us, and demonstrably isn’t (think we didn’t notice how you refuse to actually address the rate of failure of the US public school system retard? 16+% dropout rate and entrenched Teachers’ Union abuse doesn’t look good for your supposed “cure for unqualified future workers”)"

Who brought up the dropout rate? I haven't seen that comment made.

But if it was, I think we all know the cause of the 16% dropout rate in the 65% white United States, "retard".

I am not arguing that modern American public schools are good.

But since that is what you are arguing against, can you explain what's going to happen when we have tens of millions of blacks and Hispanics "youths" who no longer have to go to school from 8 to 3 every day? I'm sure the fact that one group doesn't have any fathers and the other group can't even speak English will cause a real educational revolution when public schools are closed en masse. Muh libertarianism strikes again.

I'm asking what is the alternative to public schools in a more-or-less functional state, obviously, not the failing empire that is the US. That's why I asked for examples of civilizations that don't have public schools.

There's no need to throw a temper tantrum.

Blogger John Williams August 21, 2018 9:33 PM  

I don't trust an entire society, here in real world modern white America, to homeschool effectively.
And yet homeschooling shows the best results. Why do you hate quality education? Why do you hate quality education? Why do you hate statistics?

Blogger Sam August 21, 2018 9:47 PM  

On colonialism and imperialism
Colonialism is a brute fact, like patriarchy. A couple hundred white men can take over essentially any African nation the same way Cortez and Pizzaro did. The only way to stop this is to have another empire blocking them from doing so (which has the same fail states).

Imperialism is due to the nature of power. There can only be one top dog and most people would rather it be them so there is competition until only one is left.

Imperialism doesn't cause decline and decadence, but it does help insure it is fatal for the original population.

I'm not aware of a way out of any of these issues. Technically 'kill all the savages' works but any group powerful enough to do that would be powerful enough to get rid of its competitors which is other civilized people.

Nikephoros II Phokas wrote:

But since that is what you are arguing against, can you explain what's going to happen when we have tens of millions of blacks and Hispanics "youths" who no longer have to go to school from 8 to 3 every day? I'm sure the fact that one group doesn't have any fathers and the other group can't even speak English will cause a real educational revolution when public schools are closed en masse. Muh libertarianism strikes again.


Stalin had to deal with a similar issue (orphans from the civil war). He managed to deal with it and so can we.

Blogger Nikephoros II Phokas August 21, 2018 9:50 PM  

@Emmett Fitz-Hume:

"True-but it doesn't necessarily work in the direction you are thinking. The USA's public schools are directly contributing to the dearth of individuals qualified to think critically and take up the mantle of Citizen.

Homeschool or die. It's not just for families any more."

That's a fair point, but then you have these same people who have been dumbed down by the public school systems now homeschooling the next generation. Not to mention the state of the modern American family unit.

Homeschooling is obviously the best solution for families in the modern US. I just question if it's a long-term, national solution.

@Sherwood Family:

"From the moment colonists set foot on the continent until the mid-1800's the United States had a series of home schools, community supported schools, and locally funded institutions of higher education."

Like I said, I'm fine with a neighborhood schoolhouse with one teacher and ten kids. I just think it should be affordable for the parents, unlike modern private schools.

In those days, you could still make a decent living as a farmer, laborer, etc. These days, not so much.

"And yet homeschooling shows the best results. Why do you hate quality education? Why do you hate quality education? Why do you hate statistics?"

Homeschooling parents are a very small, self-selecting group. I have already said that homeschooling is superior on that level several times.

We are talking about NATIONAL level education with EVERYONE involved.

Why do you fail to address my actual points? Why did you remove one sentence from the context that it was posted in, particularly the sentence that alluded to the rampant drug abuse in the modern white community?

Anyways, I think I've had enough of this subject for the night. Thanks to the people that provided actual replies and gave me something to think about.

Blogger Jack Amok August 21, 2018 9:51 PM  

Does the question interfere with my Life, liberty or property?

The problem is, you don't realize that most of them actually do interfere with your life, liberty and property.

Lefties and globalists use their freedoms to screw up the society you live in, taking your property, your liberty, maybe even your life as they let in dangerous jihadis and violence prone vibrants.

Where is the liberty in letting Camera Hogg agitate for outlawing your ability to defend yourself with a firearm?

Blogger Dire Badger August 21, 2018 9:52 PM  

"Everyone is entitled to an opinion" is not a question of rights, it is a statement of blind facts. Humans will form their own opinions no matter what you do.
That doesn't mean that they are entitled to SPEAK those opinions, however.

Blogger James Dixon August 21, 2018 9:54 PM  

> But let's disband the military, ICE, and the fire department too so we can save a little money on our taxes.

Defense of the country and borders is explicitly a duty assigned to the federal government by the Constitution.

Around here, the fire department is volunteer and not tax supported.

> If the government needs your land to build a railroad for troop transportation or build a defensive barrier, they have every legal and moral right to take your land. Compensation optional.

That's a specific instance. The statement was a general case with no qualifiers.

> Who would I have to laugh at if communists couldn't express themselves?

Then the conditions for their doing so are met in your company. Again, specific case versus general statement.

> Every nation has the right to rule itself, even if they're all morons.

When it's granted to us I'll grant it to others. Not before.

> I'm asking what is the alternative to public schools in a more-or-less functional state,

Why are you asking us when we don't have one? If we ever have one again there'll be plenty of time to worry about it.

Blogger cyrus83 August 21, 2018 10:05 PM  

I once would have said yes to most of this list, and even today still caught myself thinking I was possibly in agreement with nearly half before stopping to think about it. In the end, there are 6 that I still find myself in agreement with:

5 - I can't get to disagree here yet, mostly because I am reminded of sick people who take pleasure in torture for the sake of torture.

10 - Spreading the Gospel is the exception being made here.

18 - Trump-style negotiation with the enemy seems acceptable under some circumstances.

27 - Sounds too much like affirmative action, which I oppose.

33 & 34 - Yes this is idealism run amok, but I would rather people be open about who they are and what they believe rather than put on a false front and pretend to be what they are not. False allies seem more dangerous than open opponents.

Blogger Jack Amok August 21, 2018 10:10 PM  

I was 4, but it was 3 "yes" and 2 "half-yes." I answered the two religious liberty questions as "yes, for a plausibly Christian religion."

But the interesting thing is how many of these questions are geared toward the out-of-power, which is where the disconnect Emmet Fitz-Humme noted comes from. Lefties would have agreed with most of these when they were out of power, but not when they're the ones doing the torturing and congressional investigating.

Well, the really interesting thing is how many of these are really about dodging responsibility for judging right from wrong. Freedom of religion? If your religion isn't batshit crazy and doesn't encourage dis-civic behavior, sure. Freedom of speech? If you're not saying things that are corrosive to the fabric of society, sure. Freedom to form a labor union? Sure, if you don't go on to use it to extort unearned rent from society.

Maybe "reactionary" is exactly the right description for those of us answering no to most of those questions. We react to the situation in front of us, make judgements, and respond appropriately. JeShawn Gangbanger walking down the street smoking a doob and flashing his Glock? No 2nd Amendment for you, JeShawn.

Blogger Jeffrey Johnson August 21, 2018 10:36 PM  

@95 Sherwood family

I had to disappear after Charlottesville. My wife and I bought a house and I couldn't risk getting doxed. Some readers showed me screen caps of SJW fake Mormon Facebook groups. They had made it a priority to figure out who I was and dox me. I can tell you that Ayla, aka Wife with a Purpose, has had an absolutely miserable time dealing with them and I couldn't risk putting my wife through that crap.

I loved reading your comments. You are a really sharp man who really knows his stuff. I'd love to start blogging again. I really enjoy writing and I enjoyed interacting with my readers. If I ever get relatively anti-fragile about money then I will start blogging again.

Blogger CM August 21, 2018 10:41 PM  

6. No. A good dictatorship may be better than a bad democracy. Generally yes, but it's conditional, and they stated it as an absolute.

Hmmm... i answered yes to the first part, but not the 2nd. Of course, I don’t see benevolent dictators as tyrannical, but I suppose that is a matter of perspective?

But no one is entitled to support in that rebellion. That is basically saying others have no right to their opinion.

If a majority are not rebelling and joining cause, then perhaps the government isn’t as tyrannical as you assumed.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 10:42 PM  

"If public schools are not a good idea on a national level, why does every single developed nation on Earth have them, from the most globalist to the most nationalist?"

Replace "nation" with "state" and you have your answer right there.

The argument that "because no one is doing it it must be bad" or conversely "because everyone is doing it it must be good" is retarded. All that "everyone is doing it" means is that it hasn't managed to kill or destroy everyone-- yet, and that it's at least stable as a configuration. Why it's stable as a configuration can very well have nothing whatsoever to do with its stated goals.

In this case, it's useful for propaganda, lazy parents like and will defend this excuse for abandoning their children, government uses it as a catch-22 incentive for themselves to have even more control, and probably several others that do not immediately spring to mind.

It's honestly an excellent and nearly perfect example of how communist/socialist systems extend and perpetuate their control at the relatively micro scale. For a shamelessly ripped-off example:

#1: "Government should provide shoes for all children."
#2: Government indirectly nationalizes the entire cobbling industry, providing cut-rate, crappy shoes for all children.
#3: Person A: "Government sucks at providing shoes for children, we should take that responsibility away from them."
Person B: "YOU WANT THE CHILDREN TO GO SHOELESS?!?!"
Person A: "I didn't say that..."
Government mouthpiece C: "You don't trust us to provide shoes for the children? Look at all the perfectly shod children! Everyone else does it this way too, so it must be the best way."
Person A: "That's partly because every government has a hard-on for overreach, and also..."
Mouthpiece C: "There's no evidence of that absurd anti-government blasphemy! Malicious inhumanity towards children and seditious treason! Execute/reprogramme/deplatform/punish/humiliate enemy-of-the-people traitor A!"

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 10:47 PM  

"That is HIGHER than the United States.

Why?"


D-D-D-D-D-D-DEMOGRAPHICS!

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 21, 2018 11:01 PM  

"The education levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly effects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments."

"The medical health levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly affects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments."

"The financial security levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly affects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments."

"The law-abidance levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly affects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments."

"The mental orthodoxy levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly affects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments."

Mmm hmmn.

Now, tell me why exactly you think that a heavily bureaucratic entity, which is:
A: Endemically prone to power-grabs and parasitism of the original variety.
B: Already having a monopoly on mobilization of a nation's normal military might.
C: Composed of an elite that necessarily notably differs from the populace at large.

Either:

A: Ought be permitted to control education of its citizens as well.
B: Is necessarily superior in educative ability to the very citizenry who affected said government.
C: Is not necessarily generally inferior and behind the citizenry which continuously affect said government.

Blogger widlast washere August 21, 2018 11:01 PM  

What about those of us who say 'uh, nope' or 'HELL NO' to each and every one of them?

Blogger justaguy August 21, 2018 11:14 PM  

As we have given up the foundations of our 12 to 14 year public education system to the extreme progressives/statists for over 50 years, how would the majority of people not agree with what they have been taught and reinforced upon for generations now.?

Blogger SmokeyJoe August 21, 2018 11:26 PM  

71 Ominous Cowherd

"In a homogeneous Christian nation, free speech within the bounds of laws against treason and blasphemy won't be an issue."

Soapbox ranting is a good safety valve. People want free speech. They also need to be responsible for their speech. Even if it means getting a fat lip and bloody nose.

Blogger pyrrhus August 21, 2018 11:43 PM  

"If public schools are not a good idea on a national level, why does every single developed nation on Earth have them, from the most globalist to the most nationalist?"

Up until about 100 years ago, no nation had public education as a national policy...Schools were local, and paid for by the parents...And the kids were much better educated, partly because those who were poorly behaved or too stupid to do the work were thrown out, or never started.

Blogger Solaire Of Astora August 21, 2018 11:46 PM  

Yes to 2, 14, 20 and don't know enough to have a valuable opinion on 38. 27 is tough because I don't believe in positive quotas but I have no problem with open and honest discrimination which could be seen as a sort of anti-quota so ultimately that's a no.

Blogger Sherwood family August 21, 2018 11:51 PM  

Thanks, Jeffrey. I was really sad when you went dark but it makes sense. Yeah, I know Ayla has been through hell. I am on the other side of the world so I do not know much more than that. I will look forward to your resumption at some point in the future.

Blogger tublecane August 21, 2018 11:53 PM  

@92- No, Burnham was not an advocate of the Managerial revolution. But he was a Trotskyite at one point, and people are justly suspicious of him.

For me, he's "one of the good ones" as far as those types are concerned. He drifted over before the neocon wave, and he was honest. At least in the books I've read.

Blogger tublecane August 21, 2018 11:56 PM  

@105- But of course if we wanted to follow the Prussian model, we could do a much better job. Public education is a failure in every sense, but perhaps especially in execution.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 22, 2018 12:06 AM  

Nikephoros II Phokas wrote:No, I just realize that modern economies have less and less need for the below average, and that teaching your kid to do what you do doesn't work when your job will be done by a robot in 20 years.

Smart people do smart things, like educating themselves. Stupid people might be trainable, but cannot be educated. School does not educate either group. Stupid parents tend to have stupid children, so they will generally be able train their children well, and education isn't going to happen, period. The whole ``robots can do your job'' thing is connected to stupid, not to schooling.

Groffin wrote:Fuck the Prussian proto-military-industrial system’s factory-model for obedience, and fuck you to death with a spiked cudgel on the public square for advocating the world keep submitting to this poison.

Groffin gets it.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 22, 2018 12:09 AM  

tublecane wrote:@105- But of course if we wanted to follow the Prussian model, we could do a much better job. Public education is a failure in every sense, but perhaps especially in execution.

Public school is separating children from their parents' religion, it is keeping them from educating themselves, and it is indoctrinating them in secular satanism.

Public schooling is perfectly fulfilling all of its intended purposes.

Blogger Ken Prescott August 22, 2018 12:22 AM  

31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing.

Ummm...no.

Actually, arms control agreements should specify MINIMUM force structures (i.e., "you must be this tall to go on this ride.")

The most dangerous excursions from strategic stability always happen at very low warhead counts. A big arsenal plus a big secure reserve equals nobody doing anything stupid.

Blogger MendoScot August 22, 2018 12:24 AM  

2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion.

Obviously. You can also shove your opinion up your ass.

24. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom.

Duh.

26. Qualified teachers, at least at the university level, are entitled to academic freedom: that is, the right to express their own beliefs and opinions, in or out of the classroom, without interference from administrators, trustees, parents or public bodies.

I could have agreed with this, years ago. Now I spend an inordinate amount of time fighting with their opinion that you cannot disagree with their opinion - because that is censoring their opinion.

29. Joseph McCarthy was probably the most dangerous man in American public life during the fifteen years following the Second World War.

Dangerous to whom?

38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions.

Along with the right to form and join militias.

Blogger lynnjynh9315 August 22, 2018 12:27 AM  

14. Colonialism & Imperialism are the destroyers of Nations.
20. Aka Nationalism.

Other questions depend. #6 is justified if the king is in rebellion against God.

Others are flat out wrong. #35 has been wrong since Socrates.

Blogger wreckage August 22, 2018 12:37 AM  

It's funny. Several of those look the other way around now that it's the Left wearing the jackboots. It seems I still land somewhere in the conservative-reactionary range, but I'd need to take notes to be sure.

Blogger S. Thermite August 22, 2018 1:41 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger jdgalt August 22, 2018 2:01 AM  

I agreed with 8, and regard myself as more libertarian than conservative.

Blogger Paul Thompson August 22, 2018 2:22 AM  

Agree (with caveats) - 10. Disagree - 29. Interesting questions. Leftists (Liberals) would have to be collossal hypocrites to answer "yes" to many of these as they practice the opposite.

Blogger Dire Badger August 22, 2018 2:54 AM  

The biggest problem with most of the questions is how they are conflated, and the fact that they discuss rights without responsibilities.

The fact is, EVERYTHING mentioned as a 'right' on that list is pertfectly obtainable... If you are willing to use violence to secure it for yourself. But there is NO 'right' whatsoever for one who is unwilling to take the risk and do what is neccessary to secure that right.

If Gun owners are unwilling to shoot someone who tries to take their guns, even if it is deputy six pack that married your sister and plays poker with you every Wednesday night, Then they do not have the RIGHT to bear arms. They consent that they do NOT have that right.


There is not a single 'human right' that does not come from the willingness to commit violence to protect that right for you and your people. Not even the right to think, or to breath.

Blogger Dire Badger August 22, 2018 2:56 AM  

jdgalt wrote:I agreed with 8, and regard myself as more libertarian than conservative.

And that is why you are even more of an enemy of the right than liberals.

Blogger Rory August 22, 2018 4:20 AM  

@141 - Also worth pointing out that the formulation of these questions will probably trip people up when looking at them more lazily.

Do I think people have the "right" to form trade unions for instance? I might lazily answer yes, because I don't see any reason a group of people can't choose to associate in that way, any more than I think CEOs shouldn't be allowed to gather together to discuss mutual business interests. But if you're asking, "Do I think a company should be compelled not to fire them?" or "Do I think they should be able to strike without consequence?" then of course the answer is no.

That's the genius of the Bill Of Rights after all. That is doesn't grant rights, but abridges the government's power (or at least, the crucial 1st Amendment abridges rather than provides).

People don't have a "right" to many of these things - it's simply a matter that the government itself can't infringe on those things. And, in a homogenous society, the private practice of, say, censoring certain views in certain places or by certain people, or restricting certain types of association, aren't going to rankle. The point is just, if we're talking about the law, that the government itself doesn't get to do that.

Blogger John D Alden August 22, 2018 4:34 AM  

Firm yeses to three, soft yeses to a few more---by which I mean people are free to do/say whatever it is or it's not practical to stop them, but they're not entitled to specific protection from the consequences.

Blogger Patrick Pham August 22, 2018 4:50 AM  

Homeschooling is a cure that is worse than the disease. There's a chance that you can resist the liberal social programming, there's no chance in hell that they'll come out socially adjusted. Having gone through a taste of it myself, as well as having friends who were homeschooled, they were always painfully awkward and socially withdrawn.

Public school is of dubious educational value, but what it does teaches can't be taught by even the best-intentioned parents. If you're saving your child's first encounter with a bully, a gossip, or the unintelligent in authority for university or their first job, you're doing them a disservice.

Blogger Xellos August 22, 2018 5:01 AM  

What's the difference between 33 and 34?

Blogger Sherwood family August 22, 2018 5:19 AM  

Patrick Pham: that's complete bollocks. I know plenty of very well adjusted adults who are successful in their work and careers and families who were homeschooled who do not knuckle under when confronted by scummy people. I know plenty of people who went to public schools who are socially withdrawn, painfully awkward, and who knuckle under immediately because that's what they learned to do in school to survive scummy people.

Blogger Expendable Faceless Minion August 22, 2018 5:29 AM  

"Torture is ineffective"
WRONG
If it didn't work, it wouldn't be used any more.

Blogger Harambe August 22, 2018 5:30 AM  

Which ones did my fellow super-alphas agree with? Asking for a friend.

Blogger Durandel August 22, 2018 6:12 AM  

@8 VD - what 3 did you say yes to. As Taleb is to you, you are to me in that if I am in disagreement with you, I assume I need to re-evaluate something.

I only agreed with #9 in a limited sense, otherwise you have Rhodesia and future S Africa. And I don’t agree with #14 in that colonialism and imperialism are inherently wrong, I just think they are stupid policies that bring ruinantion to the conqueror over time.

Blogger The Observer August 22, 2018 6:22 AM  

Homeschooling is a cure that is worse than the disease. There's a chance that you can resist the liberal social programming, there's no chance in hell that they'll come out socially adjusted. Having gone through a taste of it myself, as well as having friends who were homeschooled, they were always painfully awkward and socially withdrawn.

Public school is of dubious educational value, but what it does teaches can't be taught by even the best-intentioned parents. If you're saving your child's first encounter with a bully, a gossip, or the unintelligent in authority for university or their first job, you're doing them a disservice.


Clearly the common people never developed any kind of social skills before public education came along.

The "socialisation" bullshit is just that, a crock of nonsense. You make it sound as if homeschoolers coop their children indoors all day and never let them out.

Blogger wreckage August 22, 2018 6:25 AM  

@149 If you wait until they're adults to start the abuse, they won't learn properly? Don't be absurd.

Blogger Lurker August 22, 2018 7:28 AM  

"33.Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and expression.
34. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
35. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government."



Really the UN said that!? LOL. There's one missing...

40. It's ok to lie about everything and anything all the time in order to gain power.

Blogger James Dixon August 22, 2018 7:29 AM  

> Homeschooling is a cure that is worse than the disease. There's a chance that you can resist the liberal social programming, there's no chance in hell that they'll come out socially adjusted.

Total and complete BS.

> Having gone through a taste of it myself, as well as having friends who were homeschooled, they were always painfully awkward and socially withdrawn.

Quit projecting your personal problems on everyone else. Not everyone is like you.

Blogger Sherwood family August 22, 2018 8:27 AM  

I think a lot of the angst about socialization and home school goes back to early adopters in the 70's and 80's. Some of those who homeschooled their kids at that time did so because they had had such a miserable time socially in school themselves. And they had had a miserable time in school because they were socially awkward and withdrawn.

Which is why their children were that way; not because of something implicit in homeschooling itself. If the parents are not well-adjusted then the children are unlikely to be. In other words: if you are a gamma or omega then chances are good your children will be. Whether they go to school or learn at home they will have similar traits.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 22, 2018 8:50 AM  

Sherwood family wrote:... if you are a gamma or omega then chances are good your children will be. Whether they go to school or learn at home they will have similar traits.

Not just for gamma or omega. This is true of most traits. Nature and nurture together explain most variation, and children are going to have a lot in common with their parents. This is part of why homeschooling works so well: parents understand their children.

The ``no socialization'' wankers I have met IRL aren't great advertisements for public school socialization, either. They tend to be people who peaked in high school and have a foolish nostalgia for their glory days - and those are the more attractive ones.

Blogger Ken Prescott August 22, 2018 9:01 AM  

@147 Torture is effective. Just not at providing useful information. It's effective at getting the guy to say what you want to hear and getting the more fearful to not resist you.

Blogger Sherwood family August 22, 2018 9:02 AM  

Parents understanding their kids is the key.

My kids run the gamut when it comes to capabilities. I have two that are whip smart when it comes to book learning but who are weak when it comes to dealing with practical applications. I have another child who is not the fastest when it comes to academics but who has horse sense and grit and will to power through even though in terms of IQ horsepower not at the same level as the other two. I have a child on the spectrum who has social weaknesses that we have to work on but is very gifted in other areas.

So we have to tailor approaches to make them appropriate to the strengths and weaknesses of each child.

We've been totally blunt with each of them about what they do well and what they do poorly and what their natural strengths and natural weaknesses are. It is hard for them sometimes to recognize that they are not as (pretty, smart, strong, fast, etc.) as someone else.

But getting over their initial pride and realizing what they are good at and what gifts they have and focusing on improving these and shoring up their weak areas is the best we can do for them.

Blogger Damelon Brinn August 22, 2018 9:12 AM  

But let's disband the military, ICE, and the fire department too so we can save a little money on our taxes.

I don't think many here want to disband the public school system to save money on our taxes. It's more likely that we want to disband it because it's a bad thing. What little education it manages to inject into some kids is overshadowed by the harm it does.

However, this doesn't rule out private schools. If some people in your community want to provide a school and parents want to use it, that's their business. Perhaps concerned individuals like yourself, as well as local businesses who want educated workers, would provide scholarships for students who can't afford tuition, making it available for all.

If we, as a society, say through our government representatives that schooling for all is a worthy thing to spend money on, we ought to be able to accomplish the same thing voluntarily without government taking a cut. If we don't, that must mean we only think it's important if we can do it with someone else's money.

Blogger White Knight Leo #0368 August 22, 2018 9:53 AM  

I would certainly mark the substantial majority of those as "disagree".

Even some of the ones that I think are justified in principle - the academic freedom one, for instance - are difficult to keep within the limits of justification in practice. We've seen enough abuse of that over the years to find the concept questionable.

A lot come down to questions of definition - too many creative definitions are employed through these ideas in service to Leftwing goals to trust that I understand what an "agree" mark would entail.

And some just come down to implementation: there are arguments in favor of international disarmament that I can appreciate, but in practice it cannot be ensured that it's actually taking place - and disarmament between two superpowers isn't going to make a positive difference if only those superpowers are held to the terms of disarmament. The more nations expected to disarm, the harder it is to ensure that they have done so - and the more vulnerable they become to anyone who hasn't.

Blogger Ledford Ledford August 22, 2018 10:14 AM  

@156

The Japanese got confirmation of our carrier strength at Midway after torturing captured airmen Wesley Osmus, Frank O'Flaherty and Bruno Gaido. They then threw them into the sea to drown.

Glad they lost the battle and the war.

Blogger Mark Stoval August 22, 2018 10:15 AM  

I have noticed a lot of back and forth over schooling in the USA. Let me point out that if the government stayed out of it we would NOT see the end of educating the young.

Private schooling would explode and there would be much more diversity in schooling than we see today. Right now, even private Catholic schools have to pattern themselves after the public schools to a large degree.

For the love of God people, public schools are the main government indoctrination arm of your enslavement.

Blogger kmbr August 22, 2018 11:24 AM  

Someone needs to post this on Free Republic and have the Boomers on there pee their pants. (:

I make sure to post, at minimum, two "scary" posts there a day. You know, all their property is going to be confiscated by POC, who is going to wipe their butts in the nursing home, that kind of thing.

It brings me great pleasure.

Blogger CM August 22, 2018 12:28 PM  


I think a lot of the angst about socialization and home school goes back to early adopters in the 70's and 80's. Some of those who homeschooled their kids at that time did so because they had had such a miserable time socially in school themselves. And they had had a miserable time in school because they were socially awkward and withdrawn.


This. I was homeschooled in MS. I was weird in elementary school and still weird (but confident) in HS. Homeschooling didn’t make me weird. If anything, I was protected from the most toxic socialization of pre-teens trying to develop identities where peer pressure was applied by other blind pre-teens.

It is anecdotal, but every story I’ve heard of stupid choices that affect hs and college and early adulthood seem to originate in middle school.

There is nothing wrong with kids learning social skills from wiser heads who know who they are and how to make good choices. Kids taught this way become better adults than their "socialized" peers.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 22, 2018 1:26 PM  

Nikephoros II Phokas wrote:The education levels of a nation's citizenry is an issue that directly effects its economy, national defense, and ability to elect and maintain functioning governments.


As Ivan Illych said, you are mistaking Process for Product.
Medicine is not Health.
Ritual is not Religion is not Holiness is not Salvation.
Psychiatry is not Sanity.
Schooling is not Education is not Learning is not Knowledge is not Wisdom.

Public schooling is demonstrated by the success of homeschooling families in the US to be inferior to even just letting those who can, learn on their own. Public schools make the public, less, not more educated.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 22, 2018 1:43 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:Public schooling is demonstrated by the success of homeschooling families in the US to be inferior to even just letting those who can, learn on their own. Public schools make the public, less, not more educated.

People who can't self-educate can't be educated, period. They may be trainable.

A good mentor can help you educate yourself, but public schools keep kids separated from potential mentors, and keep kids from having time to think, read and spend time with mentors.

For the ineducable-but-trainable, a public school could be less damaging, except the public schools don't provide any valuable training. Again, the public schools waste time that could be better spent.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 22, 2018 1:50 PM  

Nikephoros II Phokas wrote:But since that is what you are arguing against, can you explain what's going to happen when we have tens of millions of blacks and Hispanics "youths" who no longer have to go to school from 8 to 3 every day?

And now we get to the real purpose of the public schools. They were founded to turn Irish Catholic children into WASPs. They failed at that of course, but they found a middle ground, turning them into what we now call Americans. And since it worked with White kids who as near as dammit to English genetically, obviously it will work with those other "Americans", right? And when it doesn't, well, it keeps the violent sociopathic little bastards off the street. And besides, I can keep my own kids away from the animals in my Good School. Who really cares about poor Whites that can't?

Patrick Pham wrote:Homeschooling is a cure that is worse than the disease. There's a chance that you can resist the liberal social programming, there's no chance in hell that they'll come out socially adjusted. Having gone through a taste of it myself, as well as having friends who were homeschooled, they were always painfully awkward and socially withdrawn.


Having homeschooled a lot of children, including 2 above 150 IQ, one who is mentally retarded, and all but one of whom is "on the autism spectrum", I call bullshit. Utter and complete bullshit.
In my local schools, "socialization" consists of unrestrained violent assault, drug abuse, STDs, pregnancy, usually ended by abortion, and now gangs. This in a rural school district with less than 1000 students.

Blogger Seth August 22, 2018 2:12 PM  

They are awkward the same way high IQ nerds can be awkward. They like to talk about deeper things then most people and they are more likely to naturally conform to real world adult norms instead of savage adolescent norms.

They are talking about 401ks at 21 instead of how drunk and high they got last night. The age for the normies to mature keeps getting higher, if they ever feel pressure to grow up at all.

Blogger DonReynolds August 22, 2018 2:51 PM  

@159 White Knight Leo
"The more nations expected to disarm, the harder it is to ensure that they have done so - and the more vulnerable they become to anyone who hasn't."

Those who hammer their swords into plowshares, will plow for those who did not.

Blogger tublecane August 22, 2018 4:16 PM  

@142- The right to form trade unions, that's just freedom of association. I don't believe "company men" should break up their meetings or kidnap organizers in the middle of the night.

The advantage labor really wants is the right to "collective bargaining," meaning the company has to negotiate and can't tell them to go suck an egg. They also want the right to trespass and prevent other, more amenable workers (scabs) from being hired. Which I also oppose.

Blogger Mr Darcy August 22, 2018 4:23 PM  

For me it was very straightforward: no overthinking. The questions can be summed up thus: "ARe certain people fitted to rule over others?" And the correct answer, of course, is yes! And I took it as a given that I and mine are the rulers. Period. No need to drag Nancy Pelosi and that crowd into it. "Do you regard yourself as fit to rule over others? That's what the questions were all about.

Blogger Lyon August 22, 2018 4:25 PM  

Three A's and the rest all D's.

That said, the word "reactionary" is a label from our adversaries. And the word "progressive" is also a misnomer. Whenever I see "Progressive" I simply read degenerate.

Blogger tublecane August 22, 2018 4:36 PM  

@144- "Socialization" is perhaps the biggest lie associated with public education. It does not mean what you think it means. I'm not sure most people alive can tell the difference between traditional society and Brave New World anymore, thanks to the lie.

In what culture is it normal to socialize for hours a day with kids your exact own age and a series of individual adults? With rules, but little official acknowledgement of rank or class. Those get determined by competition, sexual and otherwise, in the manner of nature red in tooth and claw.

Let's say you get lucky and you're not thrown into Lord of the Flies. How does the way kids interact in school bear any relation to how they socialize anywhere else? The assembly-line I could see. But even cubicle drones these days get to interact with different sorts of people and there are more or less clear hierarchies (not determined by nature red in tooth and claw). Everyone notices the complete unreality of group projects in school.

Real civilized society is disappearing and your focused on maintaining the ability of kids to fit in by saying the proper catchphrases on cue.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 22, 2018 4:48 PM  

Mr Darcy wrote:The questions can be summed up thus: "ARe certain people fitted to rule over others?" And the correct answer, of course, is yes! And I took it as a given that I and mine are the rulers.

That's pretty well the way I saw it, too. In a nation, that's perfectly sensible. You and yours are what make up your nation. You might not like your cousin, but you'll prefer him to the funny looking, smelly strangers of another nation.

Everything is different if you are trying to hold together an empire, of course.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 22, 2018 4:50 PM  

tublecane wrote:In what culture is it normal to socialize for hours a day with kids your exact own age and a series of individual adults?

Prison and military.

tublecane wrote:With rules, but little official acknowledgement of rank or class.

Just prison, then.

Public school is a preview of the penitentiary.

Blogger tublecane August 22, 2018 5:45 PM  

@174- That's a good point. You hear about prisons being "schools for criminals." Young men go in petty thugs and come out careerists. Whatever networking and hang affiliation they get up to doesn't make them any more "socially adjusted."

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey August 22, 2018 5:51 PM  

@160

Let's put it this way: for which purpose do you think ZOG has been primarily using torture for the past 17 years? Obtaining actionable intelligence in a "ticking time bomb" scenario? Or to obtain "intelligence" that supports the desired narrative?

Blogger tuberman August 22, 2018 6:23 PM  

164. Snidely Whiplash

Even in cases where the school system "works," this is usually due to the children's parents helping quite a bit, and these kids getting self-motivated after their parents and others give them a boost up at the start. So even those kids are heavily aided with semi-homeschooling, with huge self efforts, and the teachers in these "good schools" deal with kids like mentors rather than standard teachers.

The result is kids with great reading comp, decent writing ability, and fair to great STEM abilities, but still heavily into believing the propaganda BS.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants August 22, 2018 6:49 PM  

I had 3 yes. But, I could be persuaded on them.

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants August 22, 2018 6:57 PM  

My three were #2, #10, and #18.
However, after re-reading #10, I think the point is we should give gibs to the world, whereas I was looking at it as general statement, so I guess I only agree with #2 and #18.
I noticed most people didn't agree with #18, so I could be convinced I'm wrong there, as well.

Blogger papabear August 22, 2018 7:04 PM  

@177 Tiger moms.

Blogger Solon August 22, 2018 11:26 PM  

The question is not whether South Africa and Rhodesia are worse or better off, the question is whether the British and Dutch empires are worse or better off.

I think you could argue that the Dutch got a lot of wealth from colonizing South Africa (diamonds!), but the money, time, resources, and population they spent to bring civilization there could have been spent elsewhere. They of course dropped huge loads of money to fight off/tame the local "fauna," be they feline or hominid, lost a lot of lives, etc.

In nearly every case of imperialism/colonization, the invasive state was eventually overthrown in favor of local rule and culture. Imperialism from a historical perspective, I would argue, basically comes down to "get in, grab as much loot as you can, and then get out before the natives get restless." It's a smash-and-grab on a global scale.

I voted disagree, morally/ethically it's indefensible to demand that a local population conform to a distant one's culture, on a longer time scale it inevitably falls apart as rule from a distance is prone to corruption and insurrection, and practically speaking it's hard to judge whether the value obtained from the effort is worth the expenditure of value to get it.

If we were King Vox's council, I for one would be trying to convince him to "let the damn natives fend for themselves, their welfare is not our problem and we are not morally obligated to bring them 'civilization.'"

Blogger Solon August 22, 2018 11:35 PM  

Sorry, meant to say I voted "agree:" imperialism/colonialism are wrong

Blogger Tobias Templo August 23, 2018 12:11 AM  

I said yes to 5. But I'd still prefer a benevolent ruler.

Blogger Solon August 23, 2018 12:24 AM  

You are incorrect in asserting that the only rational response to a personal question is an answer that applies only to you personally.

That is where rabid individualists and those of a Libertarian bent fall short, idealogically speaking.

It is entirely possible to answer a personal question with a consideration for the impersonal, i.e. your family, your community, your nation, your state.

Example: a vote comes to the table to abolish the 19th amendment and revoke women's suffrage. A Libertarian/individualist woman would presumably NEVER vote in favor of that, she would be disenfranchising herself. One could, however, conceive of many women who would indeed vote to disenfranchise themselves: they would no longer have to deal with the responsibility of national leadership, perhaps she recognizes that women in general tend to be emotionally mercurial and would not always vote rationally, etc.

The notion that I'm talking about is called "sacrifice," and it's one of the things that elevate Western Civilization above other much more selfish civilizations and peoples. Jesus Christ sacrificed himself so that Christians could be released from the taint of mortal sin. He didn't cuck out and say "well, what have these people done for me personally. Maybe I won't give myself up to the Romans and go up on that Cross, certainly that would be bad for me personally!"

So basically, looking at these questions as only personal questions is short-sighted, narrow-minded, and selfish.

Try the questions again, but look at them not as "how does this benefit me," but as "does this benefit the society that I would want to live in."

If you asked me if I would vote to abolish Congress and name Trump "Imperator," I would vote yes. I'd no longer live in a democracy, but I would live in a country that supports me, my family, and my way of life. That's a sacrifice I would be more than happy to make.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd August 23, 2018 8:43 AM  

Solon wrote:If you asked me if I would vote to abolish Congress and name Trump "Imperator," I would vote yes. I'd no longer live in a democracy, but I would live in a country that supports me, my family, and my way of life. That's a sacrifice I would be more than happy to make.

Eventually, one of the Imperator's successors would be a bad, destructive ruler. Then we're back to the current situation, so I don't see much downside to the proposal.

Blogger Rabid Ratel August 23, 2018 11:46 AM  

Solon wrote:I think you could argue that the Dutch got a lot of wealth from colonizing South Africa (diamonds!), but the money, time, resources, and population they spent to bring civilization there could have been spent elsewhere. They of course dropped huge loads of money to fight off/tame the local "fauna," be they feline or hominid, lost a lot of lives, etc.

They never invested much, seeing as it was a halfway house to India to them. The British took it from then in order to defend the India route against the French. They also got the diamonds and gold, which was discovered after they took over.

The Dutch really didn't care much for South Africa.

Blogger Patrick Pham August 23, 2018 5:00 PM  

@146, anecdotally, you'd be extremely likely to see a social reject come from the public school system - if only because the system educates so many children.

@150 in a pre-industrial society, where childhood was truncated and being a teenager didn't exist, you could socialize with people of your age group. In our post-industrial, atomized culture, where all the people in your age group are off in school, that can't happen.

I'm sure that you're all wonderful parents, or had wonderful parents, who take the time to make sure their children grew up right. My experience in homeschooling was miserable. Being left at home with a dry textbook and no one to explain concepts, having no friends to talk to, staying in a ratty apartment with no air conditioning was the most miserable time of my life. I'm sure my experience wasn't normal. But it solidified my opinion that it's definitely not for everyone.

If your parents don't care about you, public or at home, there's not much you can do about it.

Blogger Greg Q August 23, 2018 11:57 PM  

17 agree, 22 disagree.

i'm not racist, I'm not sexist, i believe in free speech and tolerance for views I don't like (tolerance, not respect. IOW, yes, I know what that word actually means).

But I'm not an idiot, and know that while government is sometimes necessary, it's always evil.

Yes, it's pretty easy to be more or less in teh middle

Blogger gseoa5 August 25, 2018 3:23 AM  

I thought I should let you know about this company I came across. Right now, they are actively hiring people who know how to use Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest or

Instagram.

If you fit the profile, then you can make great money doing this, as is explained here:

https://socialsalerep.com?hyden4539

Blogger Alphaeus August 26, 2018 3:58 PM  

"2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion."

What's this supposed to mean, anyway? Does it mean I shouldn't express my opinion if I think someone else's opinion is extremely stupid? Or does it mean that there should be a government Department of Opinions that reviews all opinions and authorizes only those that they find acceptable? Or what? It's not clear at all.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts