Saturday, March 17, 2018

Douge2 Wins for the 1st Time in 2018 and - Diversity Kills Nations

An NPP groupie wants a little private time with Douge2
Douge2 overpowered the NPP field of 13 for his first win of the year. This sets up a very exciting last round of the 1st quarter. Be there for the finale!

Here are the point getters and the Faldo spot holder:

2nd - Derf-63
3rd - Mikeniks-Faldo
4th - GMOgolf
Bubble - Tigercub8189

Congratulations to Douge2 on his 31st NPP victory!

Now for a review of the status of the country as told by Fred Reed, Vox Day and the best of all - Faldo:

Gazing out over the chaos of America today, the racial and ethnic antagonism, the hostility over sex and faith and politics, we have never seen anything like it. The country is imploding. The main culprit is diversity–in the broad sense, not just the juxtaposition of races, but the mixing of ideas and philosophies with no dominant culture to maintain order. 

Current policies promoting this mess are insane - i.e., they are liberal, progressive, anarchist, socialist, communist, Democrat.
We hate each other.

Countries are happiest when they have one national culture, or at least one dominant culture to which all must perforce conform. We see this in countries like Japan and Korea, homogeneous societies which, because homogeneous, have no race riots or religious wars. It was largely true in, for example, Sweden and France until they began admitting immigrants from incompatible cultures. Today, most of the news from such countries deals with the consequences.

Diversity, never a good idea. is in fact the cause of most of the world’s conflicts: Shia and Sunni, Jew and Arab, Hutu and Tutsi, Tamil and Sinhalese, Hindu and Muslim and, in America, black, white, and brown. Diversityis the cause of the dissolution of American society.

Until roughly the Sixties, America was homogeneous enough, overwhelmingly white, European, Anglophone, and Christian. This provided sufficient commonalty that people all regarded themselves as Americans. At the same time, there were many geographically separated subcultures which had little in common and didn’t like each other, or wouldn’t have if they had come into contact. Massachusetts, Montana, Alabama, West Virginia, and New York were different civilizations.
It worked because the different sections had little contact with each other. Life was intensely local. 

The federal government lacked the capacity to dictate to local communities. Radio meant local AM stations. Businesses were mostly owned locally with few chains run from remote corporate offices.
People consequently lived among others like themselves, who had the same values and ideas about how things should be done. In Virginia high school boys drove to school with shotguns in deer season so as to get to the woods when classes ended. 

It would have been unthinkable in Boston. In the Bible Belt the Ten Commandments might be on the wall in the courthouse, which everyone thought natural. Tidewater Virginia believed in gentility while West Virginia liked a wild and rough freedom. These wee not compatible yet there was no friction because pretty much everyone in these regions believed what everybody else did.

Then everything changed. Diversity began, not at first of people so much as of ideas. Reasons were several. Communications improved. Interstates appeared. The federal government gained in power and reach. A liberal Supreme Court began making sweeping decisions on manners, morals and faith–that is, on culture and values–which it had not done before. Now Washington–New York, really–could enforce these decisions. 

As Faldo has mentioned; every time the Democrats - pushing anti-American ideas - were pushed back, the Democrats created another socialist-communist class in America to regain voting superiority. Those methods included race baiting, class dividing, women voting and the destruction of our borders by ignoring federal laws on county entry and voter fraud. It all continues to this day.

The result was unwanted cultural diversity. The Court decided in decision after decision that increasingly explicit pornography enjoyed protection as free speech, imposing an alien ideology on small towns in Kansas. This culminated in internet porn accessible to children of ten, uncontrolled and uncontrollable. Obscene music poured out of New York as local stations were bought by Manhattan, from which rap came–unfit, in most regions, for a toilet wall. Towns could not defend themselves because of the doctrine of free speech and the massively increased power of the northeast.

Television became national with similar trampling of local values of faith, propriety, and race.
Particularly invasive was the newly invented doctrine of separation of church and state. For at least a hundred and fifty years no one, neither court nor individual, had noticed that the Constitution forbade manger scenes on the town square at Christmas, or the singing of carols on public streets, or mention of the Bible in schools. It was yet more compelled cultural diversity.

Then came the compulsory mixing of disparate populations that we usually think of today as diversity. First came the racial integration of blacks and whites, cultures with virtually nothing in common. It worked as well as was widely expected. The two differed sharply in manners, morals, attitudes to education, dress, and acquiescence to law. The result was the disaster we see daily in the news.

The Latinos came. While they resembled whites much more than did blacks, they were racially distinct and differed in culture. Hostility arose among native whites. who liked their culture as it was.
The obvious soon became evident to those not ideologically resistant to it: In matters cultural, you can’t have it both ways. 

When you mix in schools populations whose values are contradictory–say, those who believe in clean language and those three quarters of whose discourse consists of “motherfucker,” one side has to give. You cannot require half of the studentry to follow a dress code while allowing the other half to wear pants almost around their ankles. 

Those who did not eat pork or did eat dogs coexisted uneasily with those who had opposing dietary ideas. Those who mutilated their children’s reproductive organs in one manner (Christians and Jews) and those who did it in another (Muslims) came into conflict.
The less well diversity worked, the more furiously its advocates sought to impose it. Feminists arose, hostile to men and powerful enough to impose themselves on society. They pushed women into the infantry, where they did not fit and did not belong: more ill-advised diversity. Homosexuality went from being quietly tolerated to being taught to children in grade school. though their parents abominated it.

Obama, who transparently liked neither whites or America, imported many hundreds of thousands of immigrants who were almost impossible to assimilate. It was, I suspect, revenge for 1619.

It did not, of course, work. And so the papers carry endless stories of Islamophobia, dislike of Jews, attacks on Christianity, of misandry, looting of malls, burning of cities, White Nationalism, Black Lives Matter, calls for The Wall, novel policies regarding bathrooms, anger over Spanish on federal forms, affirmative action, perennial academic gaps, the demands of the various sexual curiosities, the Knockout Game, special privilege for this and that group, and a seething anger and despair over a country that many remember but no longer exists.

Vox Day replys:

One hardly needs William of Ockham to discern the central problem. The United States of America worked when it was American and Christian. It no longer works because it is now saddled with a government that is not-American and not-Christian as well as a substantial minority population that is not-American and not-Christian.

Lament this reality if you will. Hurl accusations and labels if you want. None of that is going to alter, in the slightest, the way the inevitable patterns of history are going to play out.

Only the most foolish of fools can be stupid enough to claim temporal exceptionalism will somehow inure themselves to the great waves of history. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, read Tolstoy, specifically, War and Peace. There are very sound reasons that we see the same events play out again and again and again across the centuries.

Sunday, March 11, 2018

Theedouble*d Wins for the 1st Time in 2018

A DD groupie (pun intended) waits for DD by the NPP private beach.
Theedouble*d is heard from again! This wily veteran sliced and diced his way thru a large field of NPP superstars to get his first win of the year.

2nd - LittleRedElf
3rd - 95corrola
4th - Jb1974x
5th - Rjmech
Bubble - KingBing420

Congratulations to Theedouble*d on his 24th NPP win!

Now a report on Faldo's mental health:

During a visit to my doctor, Faldo asked him, "How do you determine whether or not  an older person should be put in an Care Home?"

"Well,"  he said, "we fill up a  bathtub, then we offer a teaspoon, a  teacup and a bucket to the person to empty the bathtub."

"Oh, got it," Faldo said. "A normal person with all his capacities would use the bucket because it is bigger than the spoon or the teacup."

  "No" he said. "A normal person would pull the plug. Do you want a bed near the bathroom or the window?"


Sunday, March 04, 2018

Rjmech Wins for the First Time in 2018 - and Seven Magic Words

Annette Melton is floored by Rjmech's poker skills.
Rjmech used his usual aggressive style to run over the NPP field on his way to a victory this week. No one could stop the onslaught. Here is the still recognizable road kill:

2nd - Mikeniks-Faldo
3rd - KingBing420
4th - Tigercub8189
Bubble - Absea98

Congratulations to Rjmech on his 26th NPP win!

Now for some truth again from Faldo:

Seven Magic Words to Change the Discussion on Race Relations
This boils it down to just 7 words that would have made a lot of difference in this country over the past 237 years had we heeded them.

I am going to reveal to you those seven magic words.
There have been over a century of debate as to why - and who or what is truly to blame for the problems facing our nation today. But if you look at it from simply an analysis of fact – and nothing else – these seven magic words are true.

With these words you will have a new understanding of issues you have contemplated at length.
If these words were spoken years ago, we would have entirely different influences in music, movies, and language.
If these words were spoken years ago, we would have a much smaller national deficit.
If these words were spoken years ago, we would have had far less turmoil in America.
If these words were spoken years ago, we would have all of our great cities prospering as well as the small towns.
If these words were spoken years ago, we would have far less violence.
Ready for those 7 words? Here they are:

Now before the liberals or Americans, who happen to be Black - get their panties in a bunch, think those words thru.

If the USA had never allowed slavery, would Africa be better off today?
Answer: No, it would be in all probability be the same third world toilet it is today.

If the USA had never allowed slavery, would the Blacks who were brought here been better off being left in Africa?
Answer: In all probability, No - since Africa at that time was not a great existence either. It could be argued - it was worse. Tribal wars, droughts, plagues and famines were the norm then, and still are today.

If the USA had never allowed slavery, would the ancestors of the Blacks who were brought to the USA be better off today?
Answer: Definitely not. It could actually be argued that the Americans who happen to be Black should be thanking the USA for our slave past, instead of whining about the past. And if they want to bring up the living conditions and school quality of the majority of Americans who happen to be Black in the Democrat run inner cities, the fault is squarely on their own shoulders for buying the easy way out offered by the lying Communist Democrat Party. The difference today is that the Americans who happen to be Black - can leave the Democrat Plantation whenever they want, but most seem to stay.

If the USA had never allowed slavery, would our nation be better off?
Answer: is of course yes. Forget the billions of dollars wasted on government programs and even a higher amount in the terms of wasted lives. If you look at it from just the moral aspect of it, maybe we hold all life – for instance the unborn – in a greater reverence, and do not have most of the issues we have today.

Prior to and just after the election of Obama, race relations in this country were really good. Really good! It was the Democrats, the racists in that party and the race hustlers in that party that rekindled a race war - that was no longer there.

Democrats are the racists - and maybe a majority of the Blacks who are the racists. 

What, you may say? Well why is it ok for the entire Democrat Party, our colleges and the liberal media to suggest most Whites are racist, but you cannot mention the possibility that the situation may actually be reversed?

A minority can be prejudice against a majority too you know.
Every Democrat strategy is looked at thru the prism of race – and it is their pathetic way to get and hold power by pitting Americans against each other.

The race war was over. The Democrats broke the peace. And unless the Democrats – i.e. Americans who happen to be Black - stop the aggression, a civil war is around the corner. 

This civil war is what the Democrats want - just to a point where everyone surrenders to them without any push back.

But they should be careful what they wish for. Hopefully, the Americans who happen to be Black - who are buying in to the Democrat Party Race war - will start the healing process.

The push back is starting whether the liberal press sees or reports it.

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Jb1974x Wins for the 3rd Time in 2018 and Unarmed Die Easier than Armed

No worries. This actually improved Faldo's looks.
Jb1974x proved he is no fluke as he handled a talent laden line up at NPP Tuesday. The two players - 1 & 2 - in the race for the 1st seat in the NPP Finals finished 1 and 2 this week.

2nd - LittleRedElf
3rd - Douge2
4th - Absea98
Bubble - Rjmech

And two weeks ago, a miracle occurred as Poker Stars cheated players and gave Faldo a run of cards like heck would not have it. A rare victory for Faldo over a slightly smaller field:

2nd - 95corolla
3rd - Derf-63
Bubble - Douge2

Congratulations to Jb1974x on his 3rd NPP victory!

Now for some truth:

It is impossible to remove the ability for human beings to inflict harm upon one another. Deprived of a rifle, a human intending harm will simply find other means: a knife, a pipe, a pressure cooker, a truck, acid, even sticks and stones, and, if necessary, fists and feet. Humans can be incredibly creative in their efforts to harm each other.

The only thing that gives predatory humans pause is the possibility of defense in the form of violent counterattack. Everywhere in the Animal Kingdom, violence occurs primarily on the weak and defenseless. Only a desperate predator will risk attack on a strong target that can defend itself. Humans are no different.

Most people supporting “gun control” measures, and now “knife control” measures in the UK, are living in childish denial of this basic reality of the human condition. Democrats are not in denial of anything, but seek to turn the population into defenseless subjects.

Not all violence is morally equal or even practically unacceptable.
The kind of violence that should be of concern to decent people is called AGGRESSION. Aggression is violence directed toward an innocent person who is minding their own business. Defensive violence is not a problem.

The problem decent people face is aggression, not violence. The problem is not “gun violence” or even “gun aggression”. The problem is aggressive violence, by whatever means. Democrat communists with a specific political goal of turning citizens into subjects deliberately confuse this point.

If we accept the obvious reality that a human being dedicated to harming others will find a way, then what can be done?
Since we cannot rid the world of aggression, we must accept radical responsibility for our own safety and the safety of other decent, innocent, people around us.

Technology provides decent people with the means to become stronger. With modest effort, even the physically smallest and weakest person can become quite strong, and a threat to deliver overwhelming defensive violence, making them very unattractive to human predators. This technology, of course, is the firearm. Study after study shows that when decent people are armed, or may be armed, then aggressive violence drops.

A population where a small but significant number of people MAY be armed, but it is unknown to an assailant whether a particular individual is armed, as is the case in jurisdictions with “concealed carry” laws, see the highest reduction in violent crime. These are established facts.

In the 1800’s, the Colt Single-Action Army Pistol was called “The Equalizer”, because equipped with this technology, an otherwise physically weaker or slower person was equal to their bigger, stronger, faster aggressor. Women, who on average are about half the strength of a man, should give this some special consideration.

This, then, is the practical solution for dealing with aggressive violence:
1. Accept that it is impossible to eliminate the means to inflict harm.
2. Accept that some people will seek to harm others.
3. Create in yourself and other decent people the ability to respond to predators with overwhelming counter violence.

History shows us that when people do not have the means to defend themselves, they will eventually suffer atrocities. Nazi Germany, Cambodia, Africa, China, Russia and Cuba have seen hundreds of  millions slaughtered by their own government. Common denominator: Citizens in those countries were first unarmed by their government.

The moral argument is more cut and dried:
A human being is the absolute owner and sovereign over their body. As such, they have an absolute and inalienable right to defend themselves from aggression by others, by ANY means available or necessary, as long as those means do not harm other innocent people around them.
Any attempt to deprive a human being of the right to defend themselves is to deny that person ownership and sovereignty over their own body.

Depriving a human being of the right to keep the fruit of their labor is called “slavery”. Taking a person’s justly-acquired property by force is called “theft”. Both are aggression against the person’s self-ownership and self-determination.

A human being has the absolute right to voluntarily disarm themselves. They do not have the right to forcefully disarm others, interfere with their voluntary relationships with others, take their property, or engage in any other aggression against another person, either directly or by proxy.
Any government which restricts or removes the means for innocent people to defend themselves no longer recognizes those people as free moral agents. It regards them as subjects, and rejects their most fundamental rights as owners of their own bodies. Any such government is de facto a tyranny and illegitimate.

The absolute right to defend one’s self and property is indistinguishable from and synonymous with the existence of the individual as a free moral agent.

Disarmed, we are subjects. Armed, we are citizens. As decent citizens, we have the moral duty to protect ourselves, our loved ones, and other innocent people from those who would harm us.

Bill Campbell and Faldo