Trailer Park Torah Talk: The Flood

Reading from Genesis 6.9 to 11.32
Also:
“Individualism and the Western Tradition” by Kevin MacDonald, (2:15:44)

New York Times article on Proud Boy convictions: https://tinyurl.com/yyzfy7zp

Macabees’s 1:
 And the inhabitants of Jerusalem fled away by reason of them, and the city was made the habitation to strangers, and she became a stranger to her own seed, and her children forsook her. Her sanctuary was desolate like a wilderness, her festival days were turned into mourning, her sabbaths into reproach, her honours were brought to nothing. Her dishonour was increased according to her glory, and her excellency was turned into mourning. 

Music:
Psalm 135 “Slavite Gospoda”, Serbian Orthodox Singing Society
https://tinyurl.com/y5lr7foz
“Antidotum Tarantulae”, Marco Beasley
https://tinyurl.com/y2thqeja
“Sona a Batente”, Pino de Vittorio
https://tinyurl.com/y28qweyz

Tarantella del Gargano, L’Arpeggiata, Christina Pluhar, Lucilla Galeazzi, Marco Beasley
Album: La Tarantella: Antidotum Tarantulae

Incel-urrection?

The Joker is outperforming the spandex movies at the box office:

Our sources say the Joaquin Phoenix pic is poised to make at least $464 million after global theatrical, TV and home entertainment windows, and it could be more if the worldwide box office for the Todd Phillips-directed movie exceeds $900M. That amount of profit isn’t that far from what Avengers: Infinity War racked up last year in black ink: that pic made a half-billion dollars but was more expensive, with a production cost and global P&A of … a half-billion dollars.

This is despite a deliberate effort to sink the film for straying off-Narrative. At one point the New Yorker had two reviews running, one denouncing its sympathetic portrayal of a bullied white loner and another asserting the film’s irrelevance. The politically correct assumed a two-part strategy with unthinking habit, casting the film as immoral (non-woke, or awakened to the wrong realities) on one hand and not worth your time (despite all the time the intelligentsia were investing in it) on the other; don’t see this film was the shrieking subtext.

Of course all of this added up to the best promotional campaign a movie could ask for (I haven’t seen it yet).

Joker‘s profit is also not that far from Black Panther‘s $476.8M, and way ahead of Aquaman‘s $260.5M (which at combined budget and P&A of $348M was 83% more expensive than Joker), Venom’s near $247M and Deadpool 2’s $235.4M.

Global theatrical rentals for Joker are figured at $421M. With the DC brand having stumbled after Justice League, Joker continues to show the Burbank, CA lot’s resilience with its feature comic book brand after Aquaman, their highest-grossing DC title ever at $1.15 billion, as well as its glass-ceiling crasher Wonder Woman ($821.8M, another film that Joker is besting in black, after she lassoed a profit of $252.9M).

Pro-regime propaganda like Wonder Woman and Black Panther benefit immensely from the voluntary hype of an approving media. These are movies already employing the broad appeal of bombs and bruised balls to give them legs globally. Remarkably, Joker is on track to surpass these films without even getting released in China:

Joker, given its oppressive society tone, isn’t expected to get a release in mainland China, meaning all of the pic’s offshore territories have been released.

Note that it’s the white supremacist adjacent (or something) Joker that is censored social commentary in an authoritarian nation, and the most pc fare is waved right in.

For Joker to present itself as a brooding piece of social commentary and (word has it) not particularly entertaining, yet yielding so much better on investment than these films is remarkable and maybe a little scary to the people who wanted it to fail for the same political and social reasons they want Wonder Woman and Wakanda to succeed.

Production costs after New York City tax credits were $70M (though some say it’s lower in the $60Ms, we heard it’s higher) and global P&A is at $120M… 

Joker, meanwhile, is putting a few pics this autumn out of business, i.e., Gemini Man, and cutting into the ticket sales of others.

Like the Joker character, Joker is causing problems for the other scoundrels.

Brothers From Other Mothers

Corey Booker really, really wants the Jews to know he is, well if not one of them at least one of theirs:

When President Donald Trump suggested earlier this year that American Jews who vote for Democrats are disloyal, one 2020 Democratic presidential candidate chose to respond in Hebrew. 

“I know Jewish values,” Senator Cory Booker told a group of reporters. “Tzedakah, chesed” he said — “those are ideas about justice and decency and kindness and mercy. We need to get back to those values.” 

He then went on to quote a prayer said during the Jewish High Holy Days to further make his case. 

“Ki beyti beit tefila yikarei l’kol ha’amim,” he said in slightly Yiddish-inflected Hebrew. “‘May my house be a house of prayer for many nations,’ that’s what is said at the most important time of year, that’s what we need to get back to.”

A “house of prayer for many nations” remains very Jewish everywhere except Israel. They must not have a Lubavitch chapter there.
Corey Booker was recruited by Shmuley Boteach at Oxford:

Not long after he arrived at Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar in 1992, Mr. Booker met Shmuley Boteach, an American rabbi who had been sent to the campus as an emissary for the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, which places an emphasis on outreach to nonpracticing Jews.  

Mr. Booker eventually became a president of the L’Chaim Society, a Jewish campus group that Rabbi Boteach created, which functioned as a kind of salon and dining club for students. 

“To say that we were close is really an understatement,” Rabbi Boteach said in an interview. “We were the way two brothers are,” he added. “He was an uncle to my children, he was my confidant.”

Chabad-Lubavitch stresses its outreach to non-practicing Jews, but seems to do a lot of cultivation of ambitious and rootless wannabes like young Corey Booker.

And, as is typical of his aw-shucks shallow enthusiasm for things other people have told him, he’s fairly comic in his earnest mimicry:

“There’s a twinkle that’s coming from his soul,” said Rabbi Shmully Hecht, with whom Mr. Booker worked to create a Jewish group at Yale. 

He also criticized Mr. Booker’s vote on Iran, but considers him a steadfast supporter of Israel. “When you see him talking about Jewish things and Israel things, it’s extraordinary.” 

Rabbi Menachem Genack, who leads the kosher certifying division of the Orthodox Union and lives in Englewood, N.J., met Mr. Booker through Rabbi Boteach more than two decades ago and has considered him a friend ever since. Rabbi Genack, who published a book of his letters to former President Bill Clinton, said it is often Mr. Booker who brings up Torah in their conversations. 

“I go to his office and I start talking Abraham Lincoln and he starts talking about the parsha,” said Mr. Genack, using the Hebrew term for the weekly Torah portion. “I say: ‘Cory, what is wrong with this picture?’ and he just laughs.””

No, Corey, the Jews aren’t laughing at you behind your back. No one is. Totally not.

I can’t say if Ed Begley’s character in A Mighty Wind was under the same spell, but it sure seems like it:

The Assumption Assumption

Via Steve Sailer, the story of maybe the most egregious Me Too takedown yet, of open software innovator Richard Stallman. From Jack Baruth

 “Wait,” some of you are saying, “that’s right! Jeffrey Epstein had a rape island! I’d forgotten all about it, what with Epstein’s convenient suicide and some remarkably media-friendly mass shootings occurring right as justice was about to be quote-unquote handed out!” Funny how that works. Perhaps it’s because Mr. Epstein had a full list of powerful and notable friends. One of those friends, apparently, was MIT artifical-intelligence savant Marvin Minsky, who is alleged to have had sex with a 17-year-old girl on the island.

When asked to give his thoughts on the matter, Stallman responded like any 110-octane autism-spectrum genius would: by questioning the terminology involved. He suggested that the correct word for Minsky’s alleged statutory rape was not “sexual assault”, noting that

a) Minsky had no way to know the girl was 17, not 18 ; b) she had been coerced by Epstein out of Minsky’s presence and might well have appeared to be entirely willing.
In true Stallman fashion, this was

a) absolutely correct from a logical perspective; b) mind-blowingly stupid from a perspective of The Current Year.

It’s no different from the thousands of logical but emotionally uncomfortable things he has said and written over the past forty years. Stallman has no way to understand how people feel about something; he doesn’t feel that way. The community of actual computer scientists and clued-in tech people has long accepted this because — and I cannot emphasize this enough — Richard Stallman is responsible for computing as we know it.

In a world where Richard Stallman did not exist, neither would Apple, or the Android phone, or “cloud computing”, or Amazon.com. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. The world without Stallman would be a world where you still used a Windows 95 computer, where you paid real money for every single piece of software on it. Internet Explorer would be the browser. Computing would be limited to the upper-middle-class, the way it was in 1985. No matter how you are reading this website, both you and I are using systems which incorporate GNU software. Even if you’re using Windows, which nowadays runs on a very GNU-like operating system beneath the covers.

Stallman’s dull, correct analysis inspired a female student to take to Medium to launch a cancel crusade:

I was shocked. I continued talking to my friend, a female graduate student in CSAIL, about everything, trying to get the full email thread (I wasn’t on the mailing list). I even started emailing reporters — local and national, news sites, newspapers, radio stations. I couldn’t stop thinking about it. During my 45-minute drive home, when I normally listen to podcasts or music, I just sat in complete silence. The only reporter who responded quickly was one from WBUR, and they didn’t seem to be in a rush to publish this information. So, I told my friends that I would just write a story myself. I’d planned to do it after work today; instead, because I can’t possibly focus, I’m working on it now.

MIT does not deserve its women.

The world does not deserve them either. I thought back to every person who has ever asked me how to “fix” the gender problems in STEM, how to “get more girls” to join STEM programs. I thought about every time that someone has suggested “men are better at spatial thinking” and that “testosterone is linked to better performance in math”. In my mind I look at all these people, a crowd that is gathered. And in my mind, I stand up and I scream at them. I would put my hands around their shoulders and shake sense into all of them, individually, if I had enough time and enough hands The problems are so obvious.

There is no discernible substance in the girl’s complaints, of course, just the standard leveraging of alleged brutish behavior by a high-profile man into an explanation of female mediocrity and demand for “more women in STEM” (to combat sexism in STEM, which is now in and of itself wrong–that is, even if more women in STEM degrades STEM, it’s necessary because sexism exists there).

But what struck me is the assumption, always implied now openly expressed, that, in the absence of discrimination or bias all those old white guys who built the modern world would have been represented by women and minorities. The world would be much as it is, only better. Everything would have been created by the lost and neglected genius of Wakandans and Wymmn.

Indeed, the STEM-bette who wrote this piece didn’t know who Stallman is before she saw her opportunity

Did I even really know who Richard Stallman was before those emails? To be honest, not really — I’m a mechanical engineer who didn’t pay enough attention, apparently. I did not possess the awe and reverence many people commenting and retweeting seemed to. Maybe if I had known I would have been more “careful”. Maybe if I had known I, too, would have been able to let such comments and behavior slide because of “genius”.

I keep waiting for “genius” to be outed as problematic (unless applied to your favorite rapper because he turned a clever phrase, once).

The assumption at the base of all feminist and anti-racist action is the denial of genius–which is assumed to be evenly distributed by race and sex. (Of course if it was evenly distributed it wouldn’t really exist, yet…)

Scientific discovery and enlightenment are a passive process, inevitable, indeed, the modern world would be just what it is, but better, if not for “white supremacy”; it’s just a question of who got the “privilege” to create it. This becomes sinister when you realize they are now insisting the future world be the creation of those who have shown no real talent for world-making: women and brown people.

When a female department head at Harvard’s teaching hospital decided to take down the portraits of eminent alumnae  in a lecture hall because there was only one Chinese luminary among the white faces, there was the usual weak stir of protest (often accompanied by sops to “diversity” and “discrimination” by good people desperate not to stick their neck too far out).

It didn’t seem to occur to anyone to ask why they didn’t just include a few tokens, which is after all standard practice in all kinds of applications; the only reason I can fathom this wasn’t considered is because they would have had to so lower standards to include just a few brown or female faces that the disparity between their achievements and those of the Old White Guys would be too embarrassing to endure, reinforcing the perception of their superiority. Putting someone who designed a better hospital gown next to someone who saved lives improving heart surgery is perhaps too much even for Woke Administration. Better a bare wall than one that offends.

So they did here what is happening everywhere, scrapping something entirely because it can’t be racially and sexually diversified without embarrassment. I was going to write “without catastrophe” but realize to achieve equity they are quite willing to accept that–even the slow, hidden catastrophe that has to be resulting from talented whites being chased out of medicine, and everywhere, now. The result is ultimately measured in mortality. Every one of those offending white faces represents lives saved. Every talented white making way for a brown mediocrity represents lives to be lost. I’m sure if they had to, they’d fashion a rationalization as to why people must die to achieve “equity”.

They aren’t just eliminating Whites’ past achievements taking down portraits, they’re pre-emptively eliminating Whites’ future achievements. They’re taking down future portraits too.

One tweet in defense of whitewashing the lecture hall’s wall makes the assumption the discoveries were inevitable, and if affirmative action had reigned, we wouldn’t have a bare wall (and impoverished present), but a more colorful one:


Lost in all the emotion, falsity and grift, is the logical contradiction that would put to rest finally the notion that bias operates everywhere always, if only we were allowed to say it: if all this brown and female talent is out there–has always been out there–at some point someone would have figured out he can surpass his rivals–whether it be in business, education or sport–by abandoning bias and recruiting, and paying less for, all this untapped talent.

It is in fact what happened with sports. Here and there coaches and managers decided to break a cultural restriction against black players to acquire superior athletes. Once they’ve done this, their competitors have to abandon discrimination to compete.

Why does this not replicate in at least one endeavor not related to stereotypical black talents? Why is there not a women’s univeristy somewhere collecting all these disaffected, brilliant students and cleaning up?

Total mystery. We may never know.

addendum

The cancel crusaders have historical predecessors, and some may find their way to eminence of a sort after all:

On May 25, 1966, Nie Yuanzi, a party activist and philosophy administrator at Peking University, and six other party functionaries authored and put up a “big-character poster” (called a dazibao) on campus denouncing the university’s administration as furthering the aims of the bourgeoisie. 

Mao seized on the message and ordered it to be read over the national broadcast and reprinted in the People’s Daily. In the coming weeks and months, Mao sought to purge dissent and purify the ideological foundation of China into his cult of personality. Leveraging Nie’s message into a broader call to rebellion, Mao used his Red Guard, a group of militant radicals mostly composed of students, to dismantle higher education and reshape art and literature to support his aims of control.

plus ca change

If malice and vanity wear the coat of philanthropy, shall that pass? If an angry bigot assumes this bountiful cause of Abolition, and comes to me with news from Barbadoes, why should I not say to him, “Go love thy infant; love thy wood-chopper; be good-natured and modest; have that grace; and never varnish your hard, uncharitable ambition with this incredible tenderness for black folk a thousand miles off. Thy love afar is spite at home.”

Emerson, Self-Reliance

The Curator, chapter one

“Well private collections are a problem, certainly. We have no idea how many are out there. What constitutes a collection, also, is a legitimate question.”

Jonathan perked up at this.
“Yeah, that’s what I was wondering about. Say someone has, in the classic example, an old newspaper announcing the moon landing–“

Earl looked at him with sly sympathy.
“Well, if this friend of yours had only that, and just that, while he’d be in clear violation, it’s not like they’re going to come busting down his door. As long as it doesn’t circulate, he’s not going to get into trouble.”

“But he could be arrested.”
“Yes. Of course.  But if he did nothing to draw attention to it, by, say, showing it to someone–who would then become legally complicit if failing to report it–and if he didn’t draw attention for some other reason, he’s safe”.

“Look what they got that last one for, the director of the International Reparations Program, I don’t recall his name, and obviously you can’t find it anywhere; it was a stack of old pornographic magazines. Obviously the pornography itself isn’t the problem, but everything dating from before 2030 is banned outright, even content clearly bearing no political or social effect, as a catch-all.” 

“Really?” Jonathan regretted the intrigue in his voice. “It’s just that his project, well, it would really help if I could see for myself some of the material.” He hesitated. “Not the reactionary stuff, but the original sources. Don’t get me wrong, the licensed historians are excellent, but–“

“You’d like a look at the source material.”

“Yes.” Jonathan said with a hint of apology. “Otherwise I’m just reassembling work already done. I’m not sure, I don’t see the point in my work, what it adds.”

“Jonathan, you’re the only person I know who’d look a gift horse like this commission in the mouth. I’m afraid it’s out of the question for anyone who hasn’t been admitted to the bar. Sorry. To open the past back up and release those demons after struggling for generations to put them down is out of the question I’m afraid.

“There’s still some very dangerous stuff, not just in your theoretical newspaper. Even the sort of material in the chairman’s pornography collection, there’s to be found all manner of misinformation contradicting established truth. Anything of a political nature dating from before the 2030 law would be a stew of such unmetered narrative it would curl your toes. Anything touching on what used to be called “social issues” for instance–from that chaotic time when people still were allowed all manner of theresy–no matter how innocuous it was at the time. Even in casual, thoroughly non-political material the very language reveals, via its assumptions and references–to an astute reader such as yourself for instance–the extent to which misinformation was not only allowed to circulate, but held as true by many. That revelation alone is as dangerous as any content, and if broadly understood by the masses would be very dangerous indeed.

“Still, I noted the IRP director’s arrest only because they had some other reason to come after him and the collection was a pretext.”

“What was that?”

“Who knows? Obviously this is all between me and you, as is what I’m about to tell you. As you know President Feltyear He-Him said just the other night, the International Convention on Historical Accuracy is moving toward the gradual elimination of visual art from the Pre-Awakening period.”

Jonathan could feel the expression on his face resisting his efforts to conceal it.

“Well they’re finishing up the law right now that will add to the 2030 restrictions imagery, to include photographs, paintings, statuary, so-called abstract–“

” ‘Nothing is abstract’ “. Jonathan quoted the president.

“Yes.” Earl smiled.

“So, with the inclusion of imagery, a great many, maybe most people will be in violation, at least until they’ve turned in any objectionable material. I assume there’ll be a buyback program?”

“No. It’s been determined we were too generous before. Giving as much as 1000 social character points to people, for possessing dangerous material they should have turned over already, has been deemed short-sighted, and has resulted in a degradation of the social character points system.”

“And with a high level of non-compliance that means many more people will find themselves in criminal non-compliance. ” Jonathan spoke without thinking. “You’ll have expanded the category of social criminals.”

“That isn’t such a bad thing. It would be better if everyone was vulnerable by virtue of being in violation. The more people have a stake in avoiding corruption or incompetence the better. Just imagine: if everyone knew he could be arrested at any time, the more incentive he has to work hard to make things work. It’s okay if even most people don’t comply. The population will be divided between the compliant and the always vulnerable non-compliant.”

“Sword of Damocles” Jonathan said.

“Careful.”

“What, are old expressions included?”

“Some will be. We’re working on it. But the reason I brought this all up in the first place is because I have an interesting opportunity for you. The rest of what I tell is entirely confidential, needless to say, and you should be very careful with it whatever you decide. The Department has acquired its own collection, you see, and it’s neither small nor in the category of mere curiosities.”

“Really?” Again he regretted the interest in his voice. “Why?”

“Don’t worry about it. We’re establishing a collection of our own. It’s already quite large, and we expect it to grow with the mass confiscations that will occur with the new law.”

“It won’t all be destroyed?” Now it was hopefulness in his voice which Jonathan regretted.

“No. Some of it will be preserved. Don’t ask me the criteria by which it will be; I don’t know. But we expect to have a vast collection that will stored and preserved in the Capitol, in secret.”

“Oh?”

“Yes, Jonathan. Forget the commission; you’re right, it’s pointless. What I want you to curate our secret collection, so to speak.”