Sunday, December 30, 2012

NY Times Wedding Blurbs - The Denial is Strong in This One

If current trends continue forever and the progressive steamroller keeps racking up wins, we'll be living in a North American version of India or Brazil. That is likely, but that which cannot go on forever will not. Moldbug says no one in America who has power claims to have power. Sailer says that the Jewish community that replaced the WASP power in the American elite will not let anyone criticize or even gently point out that they have power. Elite schools are breeding grounds for the next generation of the elite. We can indoctrinate and couple up students to eventually be power couples with the correct, progressive mindset. The best trick of all is to have the students not realize they are part of a power set. Denial is a powerful force.

In 2001 after September 11th, a Jewish friend proud to be Jewish yet in complete denial of their position of power compared to their size in America and I got into a discussion after a White House press briefing on the Afghan fighting. I said, "Man, this makes Al Qaeda's point. We have a Jewish guy (Ari Flesicher) speaking for the US president on how we're kicking Muslim ass". This became a long discussion on how jews make up 2% of the US population yet are oddly more than 2% of virtually every power position, government, rich folks, the press, banking, etc. This friend denied it, and denied that jews only made up 2% of the population. We went to the 2000 census results for confirmation. He denied that jews had an outsized position of influence, but we looked up political donations for the 2000 election. Weeks later, I asked him about growing up in a shame culture as opposed to a guilt culture, which is the comparison of Judaism vs. Christianity. He thought I meant was he ashamed to be jewish. Friends present corrected him, but jeez, he was touchy a bit after realizing he was part of the power elite. How deep does denial run?

Let's look at another NY Times wedding blurb. In 2007, Annie Siegel married Andrew Gelfand. The couple met at Cornell (groom was legacy admission and smart), where the groom graduated with honors, as editor in chief of the Cornell daily, and a member of the secret society "Quill and Dagger". Let me add that his sisters went to Cornell and Princeton. His bride was the only woman who would marry him. You ever watch "Super Size Me"? You've seen her dad. You ever invest with Merrill Lynch of Morgan Stanley, you've had your money under his dad, per the NY Times "His father is the chief financial officer and head of strategy for the global wealth management group of Morgan Stanley". I know he worked for Merrill because he explained to me the cutbacks in hiring when I was graduating due to the tech bubble collapse. Notice neither mom works? Kind of like yesterday's duo. Dads are both hooked up. This couple was born and raised by an elite pair of parents. The couple now lives in an up and comng hipster/SWPL borough with a child.

In a weird twist, the bride works as an assistant district attorney in Manhattan despite only going to Brooklyn Law School. Getting a job as an ADA in Manhattan is extremely competitive. To get those jobs you need to have a connection, especially if not graduating from an elite law school. You aren't getting that job middle class overachiever, but the daughter of elite cardiologist Dr. Siegel is. The groom parlayed his editor of the cornell daily job into a journalism job with Dow Jones but that wasn't moving along fast enough for him so he went to law school. He was editor of the law review at UVA and got a job with Sullivan and Cromwell. Starting pay is six figures for associates, which is fine considering they are one of the most prestigious law firms in the world. Wait, he has a job with a law firm that handles a lot of M&A, and his dad is CFO + head of strategy for global wealth management at Morgan Stanley. Nooooo, nothing shady there.

Recall the argument I had with him in college. He's knee deep in the incestuous elite law/i-banking world of NYC yet he denies it even exists. Exposing the cathedral and the FIRE-DC cabal is of high importance. It might be better to work to just tear it down rather than try to educate the masses. After all, if we can't even mention the power that this crew has, if the people who hold power deny they hold power, and if the people deep in the closet of that world do not see it or deny it, how are we going to get Joe Six Pack to see it?

Saturday, December 29, 2012

NY Times Wedding Blurbs - Who Runs America?

Why do some writers or papers obsess over America's elite colleges? It's not just that they are the most prestigious schools or that they generate the policies that govern and run the world. The schools are a status signal by people in the "I made it" mold. They also are a giant filtration system for plucking talented kids from all over the nation (and world) and indoctrinating them and sorting them for later use in the system. As Steve Sailer has pointed out, Michelle Obama didn't 'get rich' from going to Harvard Law due to AA, but she met the right guy at Harvard Law to get rich through AA. I've written about how recent presidents are stereotypes of the men who populate the Ivies. No poor person ever goes to those schools. They are all middle class and up. The true split is between the kids who say "This is my ticket to a good life for me + my family" and the kids who say "This is where I will learn and network so I can later rule/guide the little people". If you want to know who will be running the show in the future, look at the NY Times wedding announcements section today. You'll find money, power, Ivy degrees and marriages that smell of being arranged.

Let us look at one such duo. They are both part of the Jewish elite that have influence at the top of our power network who never ever want anyone to point out the gigantic overrepresentation of their influence on America despite being 2% of the population. In 2007, Rebecca Walker married Benjamin Grossman. Rebecca Walker was from a well to do Jersey Jewish family (mom taught karate, haha). She was a legacy admission as her brother was still at CU when she was accepted. She managed to be president of the Panhellenic system and be selected for the secret society "Quill + Dagger" (impressive member list here). She never impressed anyone with her intellect but was smart. She somehow gained admission into Harvard's joint MBA-JD program. While in Massachusetts, she met Ben Grossman; a giant "fish handshake" pansy man she can boss around like a stereotypical Mrs. Broflovski wife. He attended Princeton and Columbia and works a plum job at the environmental and sustainability consulting firm that his dad owns. Ben's parents are hooked up politically and in the academic realm. The key here is the dad.

Steven Grossman is planning a run for the governor of Massachusetts. His main worry is age, but the man has the money and the resources and favor network. Why? Let's use the NY Times' exact words. Grossman "was the chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 1997 to 1999, and the president of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee from 1992 to 1996". The man headed up AIPAC and then the DNC during the Clinton years. This is who influences and helps run America. This is why his ugly son who 'only' works for daddy landed a Jewish girl from a upper middle class family striving hard. His dad is hooked up witht he most powerful. This man is connected, and this will continue down to his children (most likely daughter in law) and grandchildren.

Rebecca got a nice job out of Cornell with Goldman Sachs. While at Harvard, she worked at a US attorney's office and then later for Goodwin Procter. Rebecca worked as the director of operations on his bid for Treasurer for the state of Massachusetts. Where in the future do you think she is going to settle professionally? My guess is extremely high. Unless her brother intervened, she is on a wall of shame somewhere for a certain fraternity. She wasn't bad looking, and had a nice fit body. She had her pick of Jewish guys at Cornell. She waited them out and landed an Ivy trained boy she could boss around who had a father that served as both head of AIPAC and DNC. If she could do that with picking a spouse, where do you think she is going to settle professionally?

When you look at politicians, many of them (especially the Democrats) plan their lives out decades in advance. It is why they focus like mad on midterms in undergrad programs because they have to get to the right law school to then get the right internships then to the right law firm or city's DA office then time it just right for one kid and entrance into politics. You think Bill Clinton wanted to get married at all? You think Barack Obama stopped dating white girl(s) who said he didn't have a black bone in his body to chase the black daughter of a Chicago alderman? You think George P. Bush after watching his uncle W's '04 campaign where the Democrats basically said you had to serve in a war zone to be POTUS signed up for active military service out of patriotic feelings? Anthony Weiner married and impregnated his rumored to be gay wife to give birth right before he'd have to decide about running for the mayor of NYC? The people at the top of our political-economic-media system are usually sharp and long term thinkers. If you want to get to know who will be running the show in the future, just read the Times' wedding announcements.

(I'll bring up a 2nd similar marriage soon)

Thursday, December 27, 2012

The Cathedral Rewards Good Soldiers

There was a stretch in time where blogging was 'hot' in the media's mind. The mid-2000s had the emergence of blogging as an alternative pundit outlet and soruce of reporting or writing on whatever. Bill Simmons was picked up by ESPN and became the straw that stirred the drink on ESPN's Page Two. MSNBC was using Eric Alterman and Glenn Reynolds as 'bloggers' on the payroll. The 2004 election had blog influence with the Dem nominee process, debate coverage and the destruction of Dan Rather's career as he tried to use forged documents from 30 years earlier to hurt President Bush. Bloggers were getting book deals. The media side of the cathedral doesn't allow for loose cannons and rising free agents get sucked into the machine. All you need to know about the media complex is shown by comparing how the cathedral and media have responded to two bloggers in the last decade: Melissa Lafsky of Opinionistas infamy and RooshV. One is rewarded for being a stereotype of their type of SWPL gal while the other gets hounded by the left's attack dogs.

Lafsky wrote "Opinionistas" while a young associate attorney at a big law firm in New York City. I heard about her blog from a friend who knew her in her college days. Her blog in a nutshell is attractive Ivy girl gets job she (and the feminist machine) have dreamed of as a lawyer with a great NYC law firm only to find it is unfulfilling and empty. She would gripe about being an associate attorney and getting her billable hours up, about the soul crushing life of attorneys, and how the partners didn't even have it good despite the high salaries and megabucks bonuses. Her writing was run of the mill, and felt like an unexplored story arc for Sex and the City. She exemplified dime a dozen generation snowflake thinking. She traded that in to become a cog in the media complex. She stepped up to writing reviews of horror movies! Wow, so awesome! She is now editor of the Ipad version of Newsweek all because Gawker discovered her. The cathedral saw an outsider with some witty comments throwing stones at the legal dream job system and sucked her in to be a media lackey. They rewarded a striving girl in the big city rejecting her world type. Striving youngsters in the big city shouting back at the world are not always rewarded.

RooshV has built an impressive following and business based on picking up women, deprogramming men from the matrist society around them, and pushing his readers to become better men and open to ideas and values not stamped with "Made in the USSA". He was blogging from DC at the same time as Lafsky and challenging the status quo. He's been linked on feminist sites for being 'nasty' and 'evil', but when you read him, while harsh at times, the guy is just trying to explain the world American men have to endure. Was he rewarded with a reporter job in the media complex? Did Maxim or another lad mag think to employ him on a contract basis as he travels the globe or navigates the DC night life? Not that I am aware of, but wouldn't that make sense given those young men's magazines' target markets? It makes sense if you think they want to cater to guys and making guys men, and not feminized consumers. What has happened to Roosh is that the attack dogs of the left, the SPLC*, went after him for being anti-women and a variety of other 'bad views'. This was picked up by the larger media to shame the sites, but it fortunately backfired on the SPLC as folks with common sense pushed back. Roosh survived, but how long until the SPLC or another group tries something like that again.

Two 20-something bloggers of the mid-2000s with two different experiences with the media. One, who was a stereotypical product of girl power '90s thinking, was rewarded, while the other, who writes original and different ideas, is shamed and attacked. Melissa Lafsky was just another young, female lawyer whining about how awful it was that she had to do hard work for that big paycheck and how unjust the legal hierarchy was. Roosh is trying to get men to be men and reject the world around them. Who sounds more interesting? Who should have received the call up to the big leagues and wider exposure? Now, who did? One of them represented what the current media powers that be want to push, while the other is the true rebel.

* - The SPLC is just a weapon of the left. Here's the MO. Donor makes donation and mentions something bothersome or a channel for funds mentions some thoughtcrime by an opponent. The SPLC then reads up on the sites or companies. The SPLC says it is 'hate speech', which is picked up as news by the press. Good liberals then tsk tsk and shame anyone who goes to the sites or eats at the chicken joints. The common man becomes guilty by associatrion, and libs can hide behind the SPLC's decree without making a real stand on what makes freedom of speech. The sites or companies are forced to not be vocal about their beliefs or change entirely. target sites/corps are hurt; mission accomplished.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Lesson of 2012: We are the Iconoclasts

It is easy to mock the social media Internet 2.0 culture we live in today. Social media is wonderful though for capturing what is polite to discuss in today's society. I like to post the occasional alt-right comment or a very hard truth and see how the Faceborg reacts. Social media like Twitter and Facebook are a window on norms, rebels, shaming, status + attention whoring and fake rebels. Atheists can be Dawkins type assholes, vegans can be moralizing douchebags, morally reprehensible behavior of just a generation ago is applauded + 'liked', and single moms can be awful single moms without a critical comment. These rebels are not rebels. They are just the showy fringe of the accepted norm. Can you be politically incorrect? Can you be reactionary or even just openly conservative? Better get your shield in place and your arguments ready. A few souls may support you, but you're more likely to get five progressive soldiers bitching you out and one person coming in as peacemaker offering a truce that involves agreeing to disagree and no further discussion. To act and voice disgust with the current norm is to be an iconoclast in our decaying society.
An iconoclast is a rebel from the existing order. The iconoclast attacks and seeks to destroy existing institutions not for the sake of destroying them but because they are based on error, superstition and false beliefs. The progressive phony rebels on Tumblr, Twitter and other social media rage against the machine, too stupid to see that their beliefs keep notching wins, their politicians keep enjoying wins not just on election day but in moving the Overton window further left, and that the nation's conversation on every subject always moves left. All around them, the functioning world decays and crumbles. They are play acting as iconoclasts by being very loud about being a feminist, a minority, an LGBT, a disabled person, a transgendered being, etc. They get their 'likes' on social media, and if it's a big enough viral campaign, they get some media coverage (always favorable, all faults hidden) because the media is progressive just like them. They are not iconoclasts because they are pieces of the existing power structure, and usually the phony rebels gripe that the law just isn't written liberal enough to include their small, previously unknown unit. If they truly were iconoclasts, they'd get treated like you or I or even worse, they'd be drowned in the river for their statements.
The small little sliver of the internet that the manosphere/sailersphere/alt-right/reactionarysphere exists in is the home of the true iconoclasts of today. Consider everything discussed on sites like Heartiste, iSteve or Dalrock. Post them on Facebook, and the crowd will say that those sites are full of women haters, sexists, racists, anti-democratic and everything that is 'evil' in polite society. I did this recently with a Dalrock post on never married rates not closing for women 35-39, and one person said the guy sounded like Dalrock hated all women. The Facebook crowd will deny science and statistics. They will deny this because they have to since their entire belief structure is a house of cards made up of one convenient lie after the other. They can't give up one inch. If they do, it throws everything else into doubt. If they do, the fallacy of one argument would poison the other beliefs with doubt since those arguments are built on the same intentions, power and puff as the first one. They would be exposed. They never use facts, only emotions and smears to enforce their rule. They are the supporters of a system built on error, superstitution and false beliefs. They are the laymen and deacons in the cathedral. We are the true iconoclasts and rebels.
It's not easy. In fact, we might feel like we're the only ones who see that the world is sinking further into mud and slime, decaying from the parasitic bottom as well as the corrupt top. The frustrating thing is that our belief system or point of view was widely held by many as recently as 50 years ago. The example of an iconoclast that I look to as solace in our sick world is Winston Churchill during his 'wilderness' years. Read Manchester's "The Last Lion: Lion Alone". It is a tremendous biography. It is also the portrait of one man who was a Victorian relic of a dead era shouting at the top of his lungs about Hitler and Nazis (he didn't like the Soviets either) when everyone else wasn't looking. He wanted a strong England to face the coming fight when everyone else wanted peace and was worn out. He saw the glory of royalty as well as its potential effect on the people when even the future king could not. Eventually, his time came. His country had its back against the wall and faced annihilation (see Hitler's table talk recordings for his plans for England). They needed his knowledge of the madman in Germany as well as his knowledge of history to stay alive. The day will come when our knowledge, strength and view will be needed. We must not be afraid to be open iconoclasts and to bear the brunt of jokes and mockery. Their beliefs are built on loose sand. The ground will shift. The tide will come in. When it does, we must be ready.

Tuesday, December 25, 2012

Chuck Hagel - Victim of the Coalition of Victims

President Obama and his advisors offered up the name Chuck Hagel as a bipartisan pick for the Secretary of Defense. A very curious feature of American foreign policy is that since 1997 whether Democrat of Republican has occupied the oval office the Secretary of Defense has been a nominal Republican for 13 of the 15 years. Silent admission that the Democrats just can't be trusted to run the war machine. President Obama is reinforcing that quasi-myth by nominating Chuck Hagel who is a moderate Republican politician from Nebraska. Chuck's running into some problems. No shock that the cathedral writers are trying to paint this as somehow the GOP's fault when the big resistance is from jews and gays, who, last I knew, vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. The opposition to Hagel displays the problem of governing for Democrats with their widespread and disconnected 'coalition of victim groups' voting population. It shows the dysfunction of democracy of our current world.

The resistance to approving Hagel is not from the GOP but from the left. Hagel has committed the grave sins of not being pro-Israel enough and for not being pro-LGBT. Democrat activisits, rather than support and trust the decision of the man they just re-elected and thanked the God that they don't believe in for his win, want to make sure a true lefty soldier is Secretary of Defense. The ridiculousness of this involves the small populations of Jews and gays in the USA. Obama's pick is being held up for a sliver of the 2% of Jews and 3.5% of gays in the US (as well as AIPAC). The problem is that Jews and pro-Israel PACS donate 60% of Democrat campaign money. If any other 2% of the US donated 60% of cash for either party, the media would be blasting daily screeds about this, but the Sulzbergers and their media peers strictly enforce omerta. Gays right now have the wind at their back with the media's support as well as an influence on the under 30 vote. Odd observation of my lefty and connected political Faceborg friends is that they are less bothered by Hagel's Israel views but bothered by his LGBT stance (they forget who controls the purse strings). Democrats need that if they want to take back the House in '14 and retain the White House in '16. The future problem is hinted at: how will they accomplish anything of substance if a segment of slivers of the population can block presidential moves?

This is an example of why governing a broad coalition of divergent worldviews is difficult. Polygot empires crumbled in complexity in the past. If the Dems were to rule the roost for the rest of the USA's existence, it will be an inefficient and troubling process of governing and administration. It is similar to why OWS failed. There are too many odd pieces to the coalition for anything big to be accomplished and executed. There are too many opposite minds to please and persuade. There is also too small and well connected of a rich leadership for the coalition of victims to ever get what they really want. Some of the educated and elite have noticed the dysfunction of those underclass voters threaten their way of life. Billionaires who make their fortunes off of our sick economic and legal system won't take a large cut and shake up the hierarchy of power for the gullible rubes that they manipulate. That leadership may have to employ some unique and new methods of fooling the rubes.

For the record and as if it matters, I'm OK with Hagel as Secretary of Defense.

Monday, December 24, 2012

Merry Christmas 2012

The SWPL Touch Hurts All - Hobbies Edition

The local metro newspaper had a little 'living' article on the latest retro fad on the edge: Victorian era throwbacks. These are SWPLs who fit every SWPL category: educated, living in a transitioning gentrified area, liberals, quirky, obnoxious and pretentious. This boiled my blood as my wife and I love the Victorian + Edwardian period. Those sons of bitches couldn't just stick to their Mad Men nostalgia and leave our Victorian era love alone. It's cutesy get togethers as part of the Victorian nonprofit, the steampunk lovers monthly meeting, or the historical appreciation society (dressing up in the period styles is welcome). It's an arbitrary setting for them to get together and have the same conversations as normal SWPL parties with the Victorian theme and occasional educational piece. I hate them. I hate this because this will limit the possibility of Neo-Victorianism from spreading. This will turn some people off from looking at Victorian stuff because SWPLs turn people off from the things they embrace. Mainstream folks go, "Oh, those fucking obnoxious shits like that, fuck that, where's my fantasy football app?". SWPLs limit and hurt what they make their own because of their toxic touch.

Here's their stupid take on everything. They don't just like something because it's good, enjoyable, fun, beautiful. They like it and go autistic on it to know everything superficial about it to lord their appreciation for it over you with their expertise. As an example, SWPLs on sushi, spoken in that SWPL air as they adjust their horn rimmed glasses: "Oh you unrefined souls like it because the texture of different sashimi and sushi rolls and for the flavors of peculiar pieces. Oh and you even like how you can sample many types of fish quickly. Well I like sushi because sushi is so much healthier for you than the standard american diet and the presentation of the specific rolls from this chef is superb. I spent two weeks in Japan and watched 3 documentaries on the craft, it's a craft not just food preparation. The ritual and ceremony of eating sushi, which I do with just my towel cleaned hands, is me honoring the zen buddhist care for everything that one touches in life". FUCK YOU SWPLS! I am cool with atheists and vegetarians (even vegans), but not those evangelical, morally righteous vegetarians and atheists that tsk tsk you for not being like them. Even in this article one of the quoted women has the SWPL turned to '11'. She mentions immediately she wouldn't support child labor but loves the look and manners. No shit! Who would support child labor, and why mention it first? Another woman even rips on her city, Indianapolis, to say how in those days Indy was thought of higher than any time int he 20th/21st centuries. See plebians, your world of now is below me.

Block quote from woman with hyphenated last name:

"I don't agree with children working in factories," said Benedict Berkson, alluding to one of the period's more awful aspects. "But aesthetically -- the Victorian clothes, the Victorian architecture, the manners -- that's the prism through which I enjoy Victoriana. "Please don't paint me as some kind of nut," added Benedict Berkson, who also runs the blog Historic

This is what SWPLs do with everything. Now they're doing it with the Victorian era. The very peak of civilization. Victorians fostered research, science, discussion, and exploration. Everything we have is due to their enlightened and energetic attitude in the 19th century, yet they were not infected with the push for power (especially political power) and had not turned against themselves, somehow angry and mad at how they got to the top like later Anglos. They saw a brotherhood of man yet recognized different groups had different abilities. They questioned or were skeptical of God but allowed the freedom to observe however you would want to. They had manners, still believed in honor, but they wrote fantastic sex filled stories, were open minded on using alcohol and even opium and knew that sex had a time and a place in life under proper control. Look SWPLs, America didnt have the Victorian era. It is a British thing. America had the antebellum South, Civil War, Reconstruction and the Gilded Age. These SWPL retro-enactors don't get the nuance or core beliefs of Victorians, and they twist the beliefs of the Victorian English to suit their modern 21st century liberal American needs. "They were so refined, ahem, but forget the rules of property and tradition >cough< I like the costumes.".You are that stupid that you don't understand the basics of the Victorian era. The SWPL Victorian enthusiasts and the reporter were dumb enough to not know that the Edwardian period is the period directly after the Victorian period. Here's the dirty secret SWPLs. It's the same with their other little SWPL cultural identification pieces: rudimentary exposure dressed up in GRE exam vocabulary is the depth of their knowledge.

Returning to the quote above on Indy being viewed better and the grasping at a higher level of civilization, SWPLs are once again protesting the modern world. These fools who always vote progressive and want nationalized health care and other BS are spotlighting an era of over 100 years ago which had a higher profile for the church, a patriarchy, traditional gender roles and a rigid class system. SWPLs know something is wrong with today even if they are the people running it. Once a month for one hour or a whole evening, they can pretend to be in another time. They can forget the world around them and act as upper middle class people of a period where that class had some serious swag and a firm grasp on enforcing the law to keep things safe. Those cobblestone streets were so much safer than the urban caverns of today.

Maybe I am reading into their motivations too deeply. Maybe something more simple is at play. What if all of this is just cosplay with a fancy name? Looks like cosplay. Actually it looks like 35 year olds playing dress up. What does the following sound like a 5 year old or a Victorian SWPL enthusiast: "Me + my friends are going to get together Saturday and dress up in old clothes that we got from special stores, old attics, and Goodwill, but I cant wear them often because I might ruin them. I used my mom's old gloves which fit funny but they look so cool with my hat and big poofy dress. Thom is going to wear his grampa's old top hat and some stuffy tie from his dad. We're going to talk with funny accents, use old timey ways of doing things and be prim and proper. We'll even have tea!" I ask you, 5 year old tea party or SWPL Victorian Steampunk meeting?

There may be a day coming when the order of things is gone. There might be a time when enough people question the way things are going to seek alternatives. Many people look to the past. The Victorians were not perfect. They did have a system that worked to build and maintain the first truly global empire. They were a free and safe society with limited voting yet safe political and intellectual harbors for those on the far right or far left seeking refuge. In a period of flux or collapse, I'd gladly steal a page or two from the Victorians. I curse the SWPLs for embracing a period we should look to for guidance, not laugh at because a bored Aidan and Penelope with their horn rimmed glasses wants to play dress up and escape this world that they push farther down the road of "progress".

Sunday, December 23, 2012

Christmas Game: What was your "Greatest Gift"?

Christmas family parties where alcohol is prohibited can devolve quickly into a silent staring festival as wee ones play with new toys. Christmas games like white elephant or yankee swap make for good fun and can make things a bit tense. I love a yankee swap where someone swaps gifts with the gramma or grampa present, screwing them over for a gift that cost less than $20 or $10. The rest fo the family throws eye daggers at them. Good times. A non-tangible gift game to play, but worth it for the emotional or mental gymnastics involved is this:

1. Have all people who have their mother present at the party write down what their greatest Christmas gift was as a child.
2. Go to each mom and have them guess what the child wrote down.
3. Watch as the room learns who had a great relationship with their kids, who didn't, and who may be in therapy.

This game is worth the risk of your mother being off. I've seen moms be on the money with no hesitation, some take a minute to get it right, some pick the wrong gift in a toss up, and then some be 100% wrong or even lie. "Of course I bought you a Cabbage Patch doll" ... "No, Mom you never got me one, and I cried myself to sleep after Christmas of 1983!"

Christmas is a time to reflect on the coming of Jesus who changed our world forever, and I would argue for good. Whether secular or religious, it is great to take this time of year to consider all that you have spiritually, emotionally and physically, and to think about what you want to do in the coming year.

For the record: my mom nailed it for me and my sister. Cabbage Patch doll for my sis in the early '80s, and a Nintendo game system for me on the last Christmas where I believed in Santa. I had talked about my teenage uncle's Nintendo for months, and I didn't get it for my birthday which is days before Christmas. I was counting on the fat man. He came through.

Merry Christmas.

Saturday, December 22, 2012

Movie Review: Queen of Versailles

Want to get a good look at improper allocation of wealth and investment expenditures? Watch Queen of Versailles. Yes, the movie is about a plastic looking trophy wife and her rich, 30 years her senior, Jewish husband right at the top of the real estate wave and then plunging down in wealth and emotional health. It is "Masterprole Theater" of the best quality with great editing, pacing, contrasts and production quality. It's a fun 100 minute romp through the excess that was the mid-2000s and our current financial fuck up. Half Sigma even reviewed it, and he focused on the class issues. He really did a good job reviewing it without ever mentioning how despicable the husband is (wonder why? you'll see below). Some of the professional reviewers do mention this story as a macro picture of what exactly happened in the mid-2000s that we are still paying for today. I agree with them as this documentary perfectly explains the horrible nature of our banking and political system. Only with true reform of the banks and a structural change in our political system will things improve. If you hate the cathedral, you're going to have to decimate the FIRE economy. Turn it back into what it was prior to the mid-80s when the banks started going public and the financialization of the economy started. Those banks then pulled off a coup on America, and the great American bust out has rolled along. Complete worms like Siegel have been funded by the banks draining investment from productive sectors of the economy to their realm. Check this documentary out for a good laugh.


1. The Filipina nanny gets the "I love yous" from the Siegel brood. She left her family behind in the Phillipines, but at least they live well with the money she sends back. It's not technically slavery, but she's a great allegory for the modern structure of international trade. Great editing and scene juxtaposition between her and Mrs. Siegel throughout the film.

2. Father-Son relationships are so important in life, and this movie delivers. Siegel's investment in Las Vegas was not just his primary revenue focus but also his white whale. Vegas had made his parents paupers, and Siegel wants the hotel there to get revenge for his dad. "You broke my father, but now I'm an owner on the Strip". Siegel's grown son stands by his dad in a sad show of faith and to foster a real relationship with him. Siegel probably never should have had kids and just been a highly driven money making wheeler-dealer who banged young broads.

3. Siegel's wealth was from churn, transaction heavy time share real estate and cheap money. His privately held firm is nothing without easy money from the FED and Wall St. He used high pressure sales tactics to get people to say yes no matter what. Siegel is a good, lower class Jewish guy with drive who made it big in our financial economy lacking any form of conscience. Nothing like reinforcing stereotypes... and no shit Half Sigma didn't bring this up.

4. Siegel's son is the only decent person in the film besides the Filipina nanny. He is three dimensional and desperately wants his dad's love. He also sounded like a great motivational speaker. I could easily see him being a great motivating teacher, coach, pastor, etc. due to his energetic presentation and general vibe.

5. Siegel takes credit for George Bush's 2000 win. Like there wouldn't be a bank or GM bailout when you have billionaires taking credit for presidential victories. They own all of our politicians. If a politician says no, they can slide their money to the other team to get specifically what they want, who cares about the rest of the politician's platform. This is how regulatory capture happens. Take politics out of determining economic winners and losers, and you will get money out of politics. This is a bit of a chicken-egg problem, but really, if we want to defeat the cathedral, we need to go after its funding, its power sources and who is hooked up to it. Destroying Wall St in its current form is a big start. Please note that an old Jewish guy is taking credit for placing a politician into the oval office. Nothing like reinforcing stereotypes... and no shit Half Sigma didn't bring this up.

6. This isn't the American Dream. It's a shame reviewers bring this up. This is the final stage of one man's maniacal bid to be big and rich. He cites the idea of "why have an asset if it isn't making money for you". It's true the rich have always used their money to make money compared to common folk who work to make mopney, but Siegel is different. As a modern American, he doesn't just sell or rent real estate. He takes a loan out against the property and uses that loan on something else. That slight difference separates true wealth from fake, debt wealth. Note that at the end of the movie, he's working banks in NYC, Switzerland and Dubai. Those are three money centers, and Switzerland and Dubai are known for having wealth that has no counterparty risk and is solid, non-debt wealth (Dubai = oil wealth). This is why you should own some gold and silver: no counterparty risk.

7. Siegel's entire scheme could only blow up to gigantic proportions with easy, low interest money. This all ties back to Greenspan's post-2000 easy money credit bubble. It is fitting Vegas is where the crown jewel to his empire is. Vegas became hip and hot in the 2000s after ditching the family vacation spot try of the '90s. Vegas is an American symbol for the hyperwealth of the 2000s. It is a mirage in the desert. Poker was huge then because it gave the proles the chance to hit it big for virtually nothing. That was the appeal of 'no limit' poker to proles. If you got dealt the right cards for one hand, you could double up! Siegel was a scumbag, and played on this national mood. He would sell condos with mortgages that he sold to Wall St to turn into mortgage backed securities. He constantly recycled the money over and over. Everything looks classy but is dirty and slick in his operation. There's a whiff of the con or boiler room to his operation. Greenspan's Jewish, too, I didn't know that. Nothing like reinforcing stereotypes... and no shit Half Sigma didn't bring this up.

8. Siegel and his wife have their brood living in over the top with nannies and cooks taking care of basics. Like many modern rich Americans they are barbarians who have enough money to cloak their horrible behavior. Siegel's entire financial empire is on borrowing money and always getting another rube to transfer their wealth to him. He sinks his claws into a monthly nugget from thousands if not millions of Americans. He hires any person to work his telemarketing wing, which sells on the same high pressure basis over the phone. How many people are going to transition from that to jobs we need? How many projects were passed over for investment because this firm got cash to sucker people? As the CEO of the privately held firm, he sucks wealth from thousands for himself. I am all for capitalism and businesses to do what they do to provide goods and services. This is our RE sector on steroids due to tax advantages, special rules (NAR is not subject to money laundering) and easy credit. This is behavioral manipulation to sell normal Joes on the idea that for X thousand dollars, they can live rich and wealthy for a week. This man is a FIRE economy vampire. Take your losses, write down bad debt, and if you go bankrupt, you need to start over. This guy's empire sounds like feudalism. Stop draining America dry to keep your charade going. Nothing like reinforcing stereotypes... and no shit Half Sigma didn't bring this up.

9. Mrs. Siegel was smart enough for a degree from RIT, which is a good school. She was an engineer, which is unusual for a gal. She sounds like a pretty girl who didn't want to work but wanted material wealth. She nabbed a big fish, congratulations. She sounded drugged at times, and I wonder what the film crew didn't show us. The marriage seemed like a normal small town old rich guy with a second trophy wife tale blown up to billionaire proportions.

10. The easy money FIRE guys who got caught overlevered need to admit that it is over. Guys like Siegel are holding on because they know the days of them controlling elections is over if their 'wealth' is gone.

My folks bought a small timeshare for trade in a beach town in Maine. They paid 3K for it. Due to "trades" (annual week swaps) here and there they got their money back, and one time got the family a week on Disney property for 12 people to stay. This was a huge family vacation in 2009. They were forced through the presentation bit and played it cool since they didn't care to buy a place. My parents ended up selling the week in Maine for a week on that Disney property for 12K more (they paid with one check). They've already rented out the week in Florida a couple of times and have made some money off it as well as trade it for a vacation in europe. After watching this film, I realize how my parents got such a good deal in 2009. Timeshare resort firms were hurting since it was several years after the bubble popped. Glad we got to screw them over. It's not Siegel's company, but I bet it's run by similar people.

ps - I respect jews and count some as friends, but can't jews like Half Sigma admit when members of the tribe act like every awful stereotype that the rest of the world has of them?

Friday, December 21, 2012

Improving Pearl Jam - Add a Sack

Blogging about "Jeremy" got me thinking about Pearl Jam. Why weren't they bigger as a band and stay relevant longer? They were very arena rock early on and decided to go a bit more odd starting with Vitalogy. The whatever happened to alternaive nation series points out that Vedder (as well as Chris Cornell and Kurt Cobain) seemed to reject the idea of being a rock band front man with all of its perks and baggage. They couldn't grab the conch and hold it high in victory. "I am a golden god" would never leave Vedder's lips. It wasn't just his attitude because it seemed to infect their music. It might just be that Vedder was a mangina-ish, giant fricking douche that drank too much from the liberal fountain. Let's improve Pearl Jam to grab the ear of Gen X + Y men for a bit longer.
Don't say Pearl Jam was wicked awesome for long enough and also say Guns 'n' Roses didn't have staying power. GnR's run was from 87-91. Pearl Jam's peak run was 92-98 (if you include Yield), but by '98 most fans had moved on from surging to record stores when the new Pearl Jam album was released. Their peak run was probably 92-96. Hell, they had lost a lot of fans with Vitalogy. Mainstream white kids dove headfirst into rap and the Korn-Limp Bizkit side of rock. There is a reason Offspring wrote "Pretty Fly for a White Guy"; their fans had abandoned alt rock for rap. It was a great FU to those lame fans. I liked "The Offspring" thoughout the '90s. Did the fans have a point? Maybe Pearl Jam and some alt rock bands were a bunch of whining manginas, and young men got tired of listening to songs written about old ladies, daughters and abused women. Part of the problem was who Vedder was and what he sang about.
Vedder himself was a douche who claimed to be an outsider as a kid when a little bit of Rolling Stone 'research' dug up how he was well liked at his school and voted as most likely to be famous. It was an act to appeal to disaffected youth and sharpen that image of alt rock outsider. He was so alt rock that his band had their debut album released by a big record label. I can't stress this enough, Vedder was a douche. Vedder stopped the label from pushing "Black" as a single because it was an emotional artistic moment, yet it is still on radio stations 20 years later without the label promoting it. Self sabotage. Vedder was also your standard liberal douchebag. Pearl Jam was part of rockers for choice (yes, male rock bands that were pro-choice, sounds like rockers for gay marriage now, right?). Vedder wrote on his arm at their Unplugged a pro-choice slogan during their performance of "Porch". Wow, what a fucking rebel. Like men will care if PJ is pro-choice. Songs off their first 3 albums like "Glorified G" mocked gun owners, "WMA" focused on white male 'privilege', and "Betterman/Nothingman/Daughter/Why Go/Elderly Woman Behind" were vagina centric, which last I checked is not going to win you male fans unless nudity is involved. I recall many male friends of mine being bothered that PJ didn't have many 'rockin' songs on Vitalogy and No Code. They missed songs like "Go", "Animal", "Once", "Alive" and "Porch", which I like to call angry young male rock. "Go" was the warm up song for my high school b-ball team a few years after it's release it was that energetic + acceptably fierce. What those fans didn't recognize was that PJ's mangina flower blossomed on those albums but the seeds had been planted as far back as Ten. PJ were like proto-SWPLs who didn't relize that they had ahuge non-SWPL audience.
Let's change a few songs. Just contemplate if these changes would give the male fans of PJ something to rock out to without feeling a bit weird that they are moshing to a song about a dyslexic little girl or hospitalized woman.
"Daughter" - Change to "Mother" or "Son" and keep the same narrative just change the focus of the song to a mother-son relationship. The learning disability lines apply just as easily to boys as to girls. Considering how many guys in Gen X + Y were raised by single moms, divorced moms or in broken homes, how frickin easy would it be for male fans to identify with and bond to this song? "Won't call you mother, not fit to, the picture kept will remind me" or "Dont call me son, not fit to" and "He holds the hand that holds him down, he will rise above". This would echo the vibe of Fight Club a few years later. Lay up.
"Betterman" - Change to "Better Dad" and instead of an abused woman the song becomes about an abused son, and the weird love/hate relationship that often exists between an abusive parent and child. I've got plenty of friends who had abusive parents who say "Rearview Mirror" was their anthem during the years their dad/mom beat them before they had their growth spurt. Funny how many abusive parents stop hitting their kids once the kids get as big as or bigger than them. "He lies until he still loves him, can't find a better dad". Lay up.
"Why Go" - Just change this from an isolated woman in a psych ward to a young man medicated and manipulated by psychiatrists in schools or suggested shrink sessions after his parents' divorce. The song is pretty fast paced, and Vedder sings with some power and fake rage. Power and mock rage is what immediately comes to mind with daughters of divorce >dismissive wanking hand motion<. This song becomes much more relevant and even prophetic focusing on a medicated young man. Starting in the '90s, you had plenty of young boys doped up on ritalin, prozac and other brain altering drugs just to get them to 'sit still' in class. Tell me young men aren't moshing to that song for a decade. Lay up.
Get rid of "Glorified G" and "W.M.A" - I had friends who hated how "Glorified G" had peppy instrumentation but dumped on people like their dad the deer hunter and gun owner. No one listened to "W.M.A.", but once they did they made that "WTF face". I rolled my eyes at that song at 13.
Do these changes prevent the mass defection of white male listeners? I think it changes the mass defection to a smaller, slower flow like many huge bands experience. Papers like the NY Times constantly mention the need for books and movies to reflect minorities to get them interested in reading books or watching films. While this is not as glaring a problem as the Times makes it, there's a kernel of truth to it. It is easier to project yourself into a protagonist if the character does look like you (think of porn casting). If that is the case with movies and books, it should also be the case with music. In a post this week, I wrote how every '90s teen at some point felt a little like "Jeremy". That is part of why the song was so successful and endured. Change the songs listed above and you have a few more anthems for Gen X/Y sons raised by bitchy single moms, beaten by their dads, guys who tried hard to overcome a learning disability for demanding parents before special ed really took off or fought against a system of psychiatry that was doping them against their wishes. Pearl Jam could've been an angry voice that provided rocking tunes and social commentary for a generation. They rejected that role. They failed us. We walked away.

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Charm Schools Died + Feminine Women Disappeare​d

Where are the feminine women? Where did they go? Why do other countries have lots of feminine women but the good old USA is lacking in them? This is a common complaint in the manosphere. It's a bit overblown because there are femme ladies in the US, but they do seem to be in short supply now compared to just 20 years ago. Some of this is cultural as gender behavior norms have been blurred, and young women in our matrist society exemplify idealized masculine behavior. Sure, cooking skills and the maternal instinct might be lacking or suppressed but a man can cook, so it's not just about household duties. It's not specifically their sarcastic behavior and joking around buddy act, but it is in how they actually talk and how they hold themself. It is as if a generation of young women forgot how to be women. Charm schools and finishing schools were a staple of days of yore in American society, but I don't know of anyone my age or younger who has been sent to one. Femininity may have a genetic component, but an unrefined feminine woman can be taught how to be a lady. As those schools have died, so has the feminine woman in America.
Think about some single early 30-something women. Perfectly cute and nice 30 somethings might be single and have you scratching their head. It isn't just the guys they date or their own stupidity in thinking they'll be hot forever. Some will admit that the phone calls have dropped off for them. Look closer, and you might see why. What if one of them stands in an unsexy, neutral manner? What if one has that upper body hunch that tall girls (and some sporty girls) wear in all settings? What if they have terrible posture? Maybe they can't carry a conversation or show interest in another human's life? Some of this is nature, but some of it is learned or, more on target, never learned. Their Boomer moms didn't serve a great guide in the home, but I'll bet Boomer women have a higher incidence of feminine women compared to the Gen X/Y gals. Maybe these unattached gals would've married had they only been more feminine. Charm and finishing schools used to teach girls the norms of good society to help them find husbands.
People are still marrying, but per Dalrock's stats, the number of women that are not married between 30-34 and 35-39 is definitely on the rise. The absolute percentage changes are small to moderate in size. It could be a combo of feminist propaganda, obesity and masculine women. When a man is sizing up a girl he's dating to be exclusive or maybe even marriage material, he's going to run some ideas through his mind and a big one is "could she be the mother of my children". A feminine woman is going to score much higher than an androgynous woman or an adult tomboy. Feminine women know how to stand, talk, position themselves in a positive way to show their bodies, use space to signify where you the man fit in (important), hide flaws, convey emotion, and exhibit proper posture to show a figure the way it was designed. Charm schools had a hand in popping feminine women into our dating world for decades that aren't there today.
If you do believe in 'game' (I do), and you do believe a man can be coached up + improved by clothing, stance, reactions, etc., then you have to believe women can be coached up, too. The spatial relationship item I typed above is important, because a woman can position herself to lean in, to show deference to your strength, to almost ask for your protection. This feeds into that 'she wants me to be a man' button in men's brains. Men respond to feminine women. If we didn't, it wouldn't be one of the first things a guy says about the women from a foreign country. When sizing up equally cute women, who would you approach first: the good posture girl with guns a popping or the slouching girl with squared shoulders? Does anyone seriously think a former field hockey playing, quasi-tomboy would still be butch at age 22 after charm school? No chance in hell. Charm schools don't exist anymore, but more and more girls are hanging dirty cleats and sneakers up after they are done with high school. We've traded debutantes for jocks. Charm schools had limited reach, but by addressing higher class girls it inspired copying by middle class strivers. This then created enough of a critical mass for young women to hold themselves in a ladylike and sexy way. This might be more correlation than causation, but I haven't heard anyone ever bring this up. The death of charm schools removed that little kernel of proper young ladies that could influence the mainstream. It's not just what they taught, but the mere fact that they existed shows how we've devolved. It is rather fitting that Western men complain about the lack of feminine women in the west since there is just one finishign school left in Switzerland, which was once famous for its finishing schools. Every man in today's sexual marketplace suffers for it.

A Gun Recommendation

Last minute Christmas gift suggestion! Since the modern political left is not going to respect the feelings of the Newtown victims and has decided to politicize the moment with screams for gun control, let me give a gun recommendation if you want to buy one before the cathedral tries to restrict American gun rights. This recommendation is for home defense and with future food riots in mind. The SOBL stamp of approval goes to the 12 gauge Remington 870 pump action shotgun. At gun shows, look for police issued shotguns that usually have a longer tube magazine to hold more shells. I'd much rather have 8 shotgun shells to fire before reloading than 6 rounds of a revovler or a dozen 9 mm rounds. An adjustable stock does allow you to fire the shotgun from either the hip or the shoulder.
1. Aim isn't supremely important
You can buy 00 buck shot and be certain to hit a human sized target. The spray is wide enough to allow for you to hit a target without having to go to the firing range for steady practice (where you'd practice w/slugs anyway due to normal range regulations).
2. Just pumping the shotgun can scare criminals away
If a criminal breaks in and hears you moving upstairs, they are on alert that the house is aware but they have weapons for fighting. If they hear the >chik-chik< of a shotgun, they KNOW what type of weapon you have at your disposal. It isn't a pea shooter. They are far more likely to turn tail and leave than face a shotgun.
3. It does damage
How often do you hear about someone surviving a shotgun blast? Even if your aim is a bit off and the criminal just gets some of the buck shot, their mobility and physical ability will be reduced. A natural isntinct once wounded si to address the wound or seek medical help, not press on to kill. This is superior to missing with a bullet and now you have to deal with a scared but healthy criminal.
4. Noise
If two guys have entered your home, the second guy might not be hit by your first shot, but he'll be scared shitless by the boomstick.
1. Limited number of shots
As stated above, you can get an extended magazine but that's 8 shots. The advantage of buck shot spray does help, but you don't get a dozen or so shots to hit your target. I'd raher have the shotgun, but this does limit your shots before having to reload.
2. Unweildy in tight spaces
This is a con but has an upside. In homes, you might have limited space to aim or position yourself. I would look at this as a partial positive because aiming a shotgun down a straight stairway means any fool climbing your stairs is going to get all of the buck shot as you aim down the same path.
3. Recoil
You want a firm grip and stance to fire this, which is a bit more than just popping a 9 mm in the direction of trouble. If you wake up in the middle of the night groggy, you might not have the best grip and coordinated stance for firing a 12 gauge.
4. Noise
In the middle of the night without hearing protection, you'd probably be temporarily deaf after firing a few shots inside your home. Temporarily deaf is better than permanently dead, but the noise factor is one to consider.
Positives or negatives, I'd invest in a gun of some sort in the near future. Depending on how things go, it might be tiem to make an investment in a more powerful option. The Remington 870 really is a great shotgun that can meet all of your defensive needs.
*Side note: how low are the people we all are friends with who made Facebook or Twitter statements automatically calling for gun control + blaming video games before the bodies were in the ground? The media and Democrat lawmakers are power mad leftist capos, so I would expect it from them. Doesn't this reveal just how deep the infection goes for political obsessions? When Joan Soccer Mom starts screaming about gun control within 48 hours like they are Nancy Pelosi, the disease has reached epidemic proportions.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Why Your Facebook Friends Won't Discuss Reality About Lanza

Finding the alt-right or manosphere or sailersphere was a nice discovery. I stopped feeling like I was the only one thinking the world had gone to hell. I didn't feel intellectually alone anymore. I also love the discussions that take place, and the verboten topics that get debated. In the wake of the horrible Newtown shooting, this community was one of the few to really wander in its discussion of the Lanza monster. It's also an indicator of how things have changed since my childhood. If this shooting had taken place 20 years ago, we would have seen a much tougher Brady bill pass. The NRA is one of the few organizations that has successfully fought the cathedral, and they will put up a hell of a fight if the Democrats are dumb enough to push for gun control in the next two years. The media and libs are doing their knee jerk reaction on gun control now, and a bold few are discussing the mental problems of Lanza. I'll give people credit for bringing up the number of people out there that should be in institutions (would've been shouted down 20 years ago). Your common man is barely whispering the real fear that is out there as the Lanza family portrait emerges. Every extended family has a potential Lanza in it.

Let's review Lanza's profile:
1. Medical issues
2. Mental issues
2a. On mental medication
3. Divorced parents
4. Lives in society awash in violent imagery
5. Lives in society where tough ass parents are rare compared to 1960
6. 1st person shooter video gamer
7. Family atomized to the point where his brother who is roughly his age hasn't seen him or their mother in two years
8. "Socially awkward"
9. Single mom who bossed him around (per the barber)

Go through your family. You're bound to have one cousin, nephew, or brother that hits quite a few of these with baseline item #4 applying to everyone. I wouldn't say that video games cause violence in general, but given a nation of over 300 million, someone on the margins is going to be adversely influenced by them. We have to realize that in a nation of 300 mil with our current cultural and social rules, norms and legal system that things like this atrocity will happen from time to time. Most of the chatter I have eavesdropped from the proles + SWPLs that populate my work and social world does mention the boy being deranged. No one mentions his home life. No one wants to confront that fact that there are thousands if not millions of kids like Adam Lanza, and that their family has one. If people considered all of the things that had to go wrong to get to that point, they would have to admit that our society is broken and something is horribly wrong. The right might admit to it but would fear backlash. The left can't because any admission that something is wrong with progress collapses the house of cards that is their belief system. It would be thoughtcrime to admit our society is broken after that same society voted in their black Adlai Stevenson twice in 5 years.

Lanza shot his mom in the face four times before killing the schoolchildren. I haven't heard anyone bring this up in conversations at work. I've brought it up. Think he hated his mom? Think his mom might have had a weird relationship with him that she knew he was crazy but kept shielding him and protecting him whenever the schools said he was off or needed to be flagged or followed? It appears she was taking steps to have been institutionalized; years too late. She should have listened to the school shrinks, but "fuck them, they don't know my child". Can't you just hear her saying that when she pulled him out of school? You can because you've heard it from other parents whenever the school has tried to discipline their kid or made a recommendation that is a hard truth.

How many people out there shake their heads when a court gives a flighty or batty mother custody of her kids? I once threw a party marred by my roommate inviting a girl he was trying to bang that brought along my ex-aunt. My ex-aunt was 9 years my senior but raged it playing beer pong. Where was my uncle? Living back with my grandparents and emotionally destroyed because the courts said she, the lower income earner, should get the kids because "despite having different fathers the only consistency the kids have is each other" (my lesson learned in 2002: don't marry a single mom). He didn't have my cousin that night, so my cousin was with a baby sitter instead of his father or mother. Not every dad wants to have primary or half shared custody, but I bet more do than are awarded custody. These elements are just contributing factors that few are discussing because we don't want to since they are so widespread.

It's overused and not a perfect analogy, but society is like a complicated machine. When you have repetitive functions that have slightly higher rates of dysfunction and error even if the failure rate is very low, repeat those functions enough and the machine will spit out bad parts, destroy bits or break down. In society, multiply small problems by 300 million, and you're going to get Holmes, Loughner and Lanza. You're going to get black 16 year olds who assign no value to human life shooting people over $20 + an obsolete cell phone.

Pearl Jam's song "Jeremy" was written 20 years ago, so the Jeremy type was a prevelant enough phenomenom that a group could write a song about it, and everyone would understand it and love the music video two decades ago. We've only become worse, and we'll lament the breakdown of the family unit but do nothing about it. The right notices the destruction of the family, but few politicians strike at the heart of the government subsidization of dysfunction. The left can't act because then they'd upset the social failures + welfare junkies dependent on them.

It's another symptom of politics becoming just about money and power, not policy. A healthy nation could debate the widespread use of mental medication on minors without the need for a celebrity to bring it up on the Today show (thanks Tom Cruise). A healthy nation wouldn't mock values voters in the face of so much dysfunction. A healthy society wouldn't have to face the fact that there are thousands, if not millions, of teens and young men like Lanza out there because they wouldn't be there in the first place. This is only going to get worse because we only have the wish and not the will to fix society.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Pearl Jam's "Jeremy" + Boomer Denial

What was going on in Pearl Jam's "Jeremy"? Why does it feel like we relive that video every couple of years? This is the anthem of that grunge Gen X outsider "pose".
Song recap: At home, a boy draws picture of self standing victorious on a mountain with dead below him. He envisions himself as a king of this world. His dad isnt affectionate or attentive. Mom didnt care and the boy wasnt up to her tastes. Jeremy is a harmless looking kid who gets picked on non-stop. Jeremy is such a loser than when he speaks in class, other kids note it. He gets angry and bites a female authority figure on the boob, punching the narrator in the jaw.
Here's the small, but important reveal... That isnt the event where Jeremy lost it that inspires the narrator to sing. The narrator says his jaw dropped from the surprise left handed punch just like the later day the narrator "hears something", and then segways to the stories of the kid's parents being indifferent to him. The narrator would hear those stories as excuses for why Jeremy lost it in school. The repetition gives it away. It's adults using adult words (affection?) and phrases (something mommy wouldn't wear?) to describe a less than stellar home life that excuses away what is a child's psychotic break. My guess is a gunshot. Considering the video, Jeremy killed himself in front of his class. The kids have blood splattered on them and pose with raised arms and heads turned not in a defensive move. They are not hiding below the desk's level, but turning their heads and blocking their faces like they do not want to get splattered with blood. That was how Jeremy expressed himself and spoke in class. He killed himself. You try to erase blood from a blackboard. Most people think the song is about the boob biting and fighting episode. That is just the narrator singing about this strange kid and the events and behavior that progressed to the big event, which he still can't talk about.
This song was a hit twenty years ago. For better or worse, it was a prime anthem of Gen X and the grunge era. The video is one of the best narrative videos ever, and definitely top 5 for videos in the '90s. Search in your gut and tell me Gen X/Y kids if this song didn't speak to you... even if you were top dog at school, you might have had indifferent Boomer parents. Good parents that doted on you, you might have been teased or an outcast in school. At some point in your school days, you felt like Jeremy. The song allows you to feel like Jeremy but also say "Yeah fuck my friends/family/school, but I'm not crazy like Jeremy". I'm a rebel but in a conformist way. That's why you were listening to a major label artist's song and not killing kittens in the woods.
Now to you Boomers in denial that this is your creation. Snap out of it. This is not all Boomers, but you know who I am talking to here. Boomers, you selfish overrated pieces of shit, you are the parents who raised Jeremy. Jeremy didnt exist in prior ages. Jeremy could only exist in a world where couples obsessed with material wealth, couples turned away from God, and couples who had a hard time remaining couples were the norm. You can act shocked every single time a young man loses his shit and kills people because it didnt happen in your day. You're right. It didnt happen in your day because your parents created the world that you grew up in. They beat the Nazis and the Japanese at the same time, supplied the world with food + basic necessities after the conflict and came home to provide great homes for their kids. Those lucky to survive the great depression and WW2 lived through the '60s and 70's to see their kids rebel and fight against everything that they had built and defended. Boomers decided to destroy civic and religious institutions, not trust anyone over 30 (until they turned 30), changed politics + college forever, fostered our sue happy culture, raised divorce rates to nearly 50% for a while, and had abortions at rates never seen before or since. The survivors in thsi wasteland, your younger brothers and sisters at the older end of the spectrum and your children in Gen X + Y, have grown up in this 'negative society' that you have built where traditionally good behaviors are bad and dysfunction is celebrated as good.
You want to act shocked about each new Jeremy that seems to happen more often now? Fuck you. This is your world. You built it. We endure it. You didnt see the decay because your former hippie turned corporate desk jockey ass was busy sending jobs offshore, spending money no one had because we suddenly got cheap "credit", and delighted in the mass entertainment wonders showcasing ever increasing amounts of violence and sexual depravity. How dumb are the type of Boomers I am angry at? They called Vietnam vets like my uncle the poor kid who got drafted because he didnt have a college deferment "baby killers" only to turn around a couple years later and march for abortion rights, which is technically killing babies. Go ahead and recoil from the monster Adam Lanza. He's the kid you didn't give a shit about. Not all of you Boomers, but just that sliver of you that acted as tastemakers and were the loudmouths at parties and family get togethers that had to be the center of attention. You've got no money saved for retirement. You won't be working long. You didnt give a shit about your kids. You've spent decades denying that the world is a dangerous place. Now, you're going to need us because Jeremy can't take care of you. Stop with the fake moral grandstanding, sit in the backseat and shut the fuck up.

Monday, December 17, 2012

An Example of SWPL Work

If you're a white person who has graduated from college, you are a little bit SWPL. Deny it all you want, but thre's some things on the stuff white people like list that you do like and sometimes for the very reasons the site mocks. Being SWPL is like OCD and unlike pregnancy. You can be a little bit SWPL like how your mom might be a little bit OCD with her Christmas decorations. There is a spectrum. I like to mock SWPLs, but they do contribute to society. Many work and have kids. Through my wife's presence in the artist realm, I am exposed to many hipsters and SWPLs. One acquaintance is a huge SWPL, so much that she admits it and enjoys the SWPL site because it describes her to a T. She also has one of the most SWPL jobs I have ever heard of: government health advocate for smoking and air policy. Let's review her work to get into the mind of the SWPL and see how useless some of their work is.
This SWPL has a master's degree that she earned from a liberal college in the American northeast. She returned home to the midwest and got a job with the government. Her job is in the state health department focusing on anti-tobacco policy. She reads research on smoking cessation programs, sits at the health table at conventions, reviews data on smoking statistics, and does something called air monitoring. Air monitoring is when we taxpayers fund a credentialed soldier in the cathedral to go to a set location and use a doo-hickey gadget to monitor the air for particles and gases. This is to check them vs. prior levels of the same particles and gases. We need to know air quality to make sure people are safe and healthy. This is ridiculous considering how US emmissions of pollution, soot and 'bad' particles is down since manufacturing left for foreign lands + coal is being burnt less and less. This is her job.
Let's use her own description of what she does....
"I oversee the development and implementation of the program evaluation plan for the Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Commission and the State Tobacco Control 2015 Strategic Plan. Programs include tobacco counter-marketing, community-based prevention activities, policy, and cessation systems change. I also manage the tobacco control surveillance systems in State: the Youth Tobacco Survey and the Adult Tobacco Survey, including survey administration, data analysis, and reporting. I also work with the State Behaviorial Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) coordinator to ensure that current methods in the field of tobacco control for survey instrument development are implemented. I'm responsible for establishing and managing all program monitoring systems for contractors and grantees, such as program reporting mechanisms, to assure that contract deliverables and objectives are met. Outcomes data and metrics are then provided to TPC program staff such as Regional Program Directors and other stakeholders. I provide technical assistance and training to program staff and grantees on program evaluation procedures, and also develops tools and to assist grantees as they implement work plans. I work with academic institutions throughout the state to foster tobacco related research and evaluation in State and assist in submitting abstracts and proposals for presentations to national tobacco control and public health conferences and related meetings, as well as submissions to peer-reviewed publications. I serve as a member of TPC's leadership and management team including contributing to program planning, project management of statewide initiatives as needed, advising on evaluation and program monitoring, and facilitating staff meetings as needed."
Do we need her considering every cigarette pack has a health warning on it? Do we need her considering TV has anti-tobacco ads constantly telling people how many folks die a year from smoking? With the long reach of modern media + warnings on every pack, do we need a highly educated worker bee in the state apparatus working on smoking policy? No. This woman has a make work job. It's 2012 not 1950; we don't need her telling people smoking is bad. People know smoking is bad for you, and the 17-20% of the population that smokes is a combination of addicts and people who like smoking and/or nicotine. Nicotine gives me a quick rush, but I have a low tolerance (nicotine poisoning) and stay away. What marginal reduction in smoking do we get from workers like her? Close to zero if not zero. What is her purpose for the greater good? All of the information in the public sphere that she can discuss is out there already with required advertising against smoking on TV and a ban on positive cigarette ads on TV. It's a one sided argument. What does she add? Nothing.
Her use to you and I is minimal if nonexistent. Her use to the cathedral is high. If you notice in her description, she does mention monitoring certain things so that contractors and grantees meet requirements. She is a gatekeeper for government funds. Her job is to make sure certain clients of the cathedral are jumping at the right height in order to get their piece of the redistributed pie. It's not just about robbing from the productive class to give to the unproductive. It's about robbing the productive to give to the dependent to strengthen the bonds of the dependent. Through the money channel, the ideas of the cathedral spread. The bureaucracy grows and the money flows. I'd add another purpose she serves. When she is at a party of family gathering, due to her job and credentials, low information or medium information people will value her opinion on health policy. Nothing strengthened my belief in the cathedral's strength more than hearing my wife's cousin who is getting his master's in health policy repeat the same concerns and talking points about fatties costing US health care consumers as this friend. The coming anti-obesity drive will use the same avenues as anti-smoking. I doubt the PC world will fat shame tubbahs like they shamed and cursed smokers. It will be interesting. People like this SWPL will be at the vanguard though gently reminding people not to eat so much and shaking down big business + small contractors to make sure that everyone toes the line.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Idea for Unemployed Hipsters - Start a Grade School

Are you an unemployed hipster? Do you have student loans that need to be paid off or you'll be selling your body, plasma, sperm or eggs soon? Fearful of selling out and becoming just another bourgeois drone worker?

Start a school. Here's the accreditation rules in Indiana (for example), but if it is private, you don't have to worry about certain rules. Some states also convert some student loans to grants if you teach for X many years. Get off your asses and do something.

1. Look at gentrifying areas in your metro area. research one with a lower average age. Do not try this in a gentrified area full of over 50 whties returning to their childhood city and swimming in nostalgia.

2. Look for a dumpy warehouse or old factory building with two floors in that area. Second floor can just be partial floor like in older industrial buildings. Pool resources of your parents to buy building and fix it up. You will teach on floor 1 and sleep on floor 2. Partly to save money, partly for public relations (see #9). Don't make individual rooms for classes, just big dividers and space out learning areas.

3. Get your 5 unemployed friends (from families with some money) at Starbucks excited about making a difference, having an impact, and giving back to the world.

4. Go door to door in the gentrified area and 'take surveys', which is surveillance and market research for your school.

5. Buy the mailing list for Democrat donors under 40 in the census tracts that encompass the gentrification zone and borderlands + Democrat donors over 40 from the whole metro area. Mail the under 40 donors advertisements for your new school. Price it below other private schools. Stress the low student to teacher ratio (15:1). Mail the same ads but attached to a fundraising flyer to the over 40 donors.

6. One class per grade. Each of you teach a grade from K-3. You teach everything. If you don't like it, divide teaching by subject and rotate kids. Whomever is the most outgoing, extroverted and talkative of the bunch will be the recruiter for students as well as fundraiser. This person should also pay real estate agents who work rentals and sales to mention the up and coming new styled 'private' school that is cheaper than other private schools but runs a very selective admissions process.

7. Have an application longer than the college common app, do parent interviews, run people through hoops, but in the end just select randomly from the wealthier couples.

8. Contract out lunch to healthy food BS company.

9. Contact one of your douchey friends who writes for the weekly, free alt-mag and beg them to stop smoking weed long enough to write an article on this 'EXCITING NEW SCHOOLING IDEA'. This is where the sleeping at the location sacrifice comes in handy. Local paper might subcontract this article to be in the daily.

10.  Teach your ass off to keep people applying, but rest assured that teaching the children of SWPLs, wealthy minorities and gentrifiers will be easy since those parents will be involved. If you're truly not materialistic, you should earn enough money to cover your debts, costs of marketing + minimal admin (just one of you), and minimal salaries (remember no rent anymore since you live there). You now have every holiday and summers off to work on your art or write that book. You are also able to brag that you're educating in a new, radical way, helping people try to repopulate the decaying parts of your metro area.

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Porn as a Gauge of Decline

I read an old joke several years ago....

In the '70s, any girl could do porn.
In the '80s, any pretty girl could do porn.
In the '90s, any pretty girl with implants could do porn.
In the 2000s, any girl can do porn.

The joke was on the progression of prettier female porn performers being wiped away by the rise of the Internet. The lie is that to be paid well for performing in porn, a girl must be pretty and far prettier than the '80s porn chicks. This is a sign of decline. Even if the money is there, and so few make decent money, the money rarely lasts and is pissed away often like sports stars or Hollywood teen stars. It's a horrible industry that grinds people up. Pretty, young women should not enter this industry. The prettier the women get the less stigma there is to the industry. This also means these pretty, young women see a better life by entering this industry than the alternatives (working or using their looks for family formation with a good guy who will set them up for life). These are both signs of decline in society at large.
The pictures in this post are of Nicole Aniston. I used her as she is a double "10" (10 face, 10 body), and yes, I realize her facial symmetry is a bit off. I didn't use Tori Black because Tori's an A cup, but it applies for their circle of the well paid, pretty porn performers. This woman never should have entered porn. Glamour modelling would have been a good path (despite her short height), but had she any sense or even just a decent home life, she could have parlayed her looks into grabbing a Mr. Big. Even just stripping is a big step up. On another site, I did a what if Tori Black timeline, and I might post it here. This is not a good sign folks. Sure, the top 100 women of porn probably have something "off" in the facial beauty department, but they blow away the top 100 women of the '70s and '80s pornos. The mainstreaming of porn has had odd effects on modern American culture, and it does not look to be slowing down at all.

cross posted at my female aesthetics blog "Judgement of Paris"

Unconventi​onal Thought on Tuition Inflation

The hypergrowth of college tuition is on the minds of many as the under age 30 unemployment rate keeps creeping higher. Tuition costs no longer have any connection with potential future earnings. We've seen the charts that show a neverending rise in college tuition. This problem has many inputs. It is a perfect storm of bad policy. Due to the media's need to cover for it's cathedral buddies in academia, we can only hear so much of the story. Where is the series that audits a big name university? Why do media reports constantly cite the rise in student loans and tuition costs but never ask why tuition is going up? Some reports mention how public universities do keep private tuition costs in mind when they set their rates, and that private universities do look to certain schools (Ivies + the sister schools) as a yardstick or parade leader. No report ever brings up the foreign exchange element: both students and exchange rates. The sinking of the dollar in the international market since 2000 is part of the reason why college has outpaced inflation the last 10 years.
Ron Unz's article on college admissions was a nice wake up call to the folks out there on the outside not realizing how weird the make up is of America's elite schools. One thing not really discussed was the higher percentage of international students at elite Ivies compared to normal colleges. Yale and Cornell admit that 17% and 19% of their undergrad students are international students while Princeton and Harvard say international students make up 11% of their total (Harvard contradictions here). The Harvard/Princeton numbers seem off, especially considering how they bragged several years ago about admission classes being 15-20% international. Compared to the average private school or a very good public university, those numbers are way out of line. The University of Michigan is a fantastic school yet international students only make up 5.7% of their undergrads (31% of graduate students, thanks cathedral!). Harvard and their ilk have a worldwide pool to draw from versus more regional or state sized pools like many other colleges. Their elite label helps boost demand and offers them a different type of student: the rich foreign kid. Ivy applicants are smart kids, the rich kids of the USA, and the rich kids of foreign countries. More rich kids means fewer students who are sensitive to price increases. Foreign rich kids also change the tuition concerns because of exchange rates.
The USDX, which is the US dollar composite exchange rate, hit 121 in 2000. The euro was trading at roughly .80 cents to 1 euro. As the FED engaged in money printing starting in 2001, the USDX slid to 80 in the mid '00s and has not breached 100 since '03. For foreign students, especially European kids, the Ivies became cheap. Ivies and fellow elite schools knew they could charge $30K/year to these kids, as the dollar became cheaper, they knew they could ask for more from these euros and get it because it cost the foreigners the same. Instead of offering a US rate vs. an International rate like state colleges do for tuition, the Ivies said "Fuck Americans" and jacked up the rates on everyone. If you consider the collapse of the dollar since 2001 on international exchange markets, the cost of Harvard or Yale looks the same as they did 10 years ago to a lot of foreign kids (EURUSD changed from .80 to 1.30 therefore 48K now feels like 30K then). Making up 15-20% of the school's populations, the foreign effect has a huge impact to the revenue generated by tuition. America's college system is like an export, we just import the students.
This hurts everyone in multiple ways. First, American students looking at these colleges get roasted just because Harvard wants to make certain they maximize their dollars out of foreign kids. Second, all private liberal arts colleges in the American northeast do 'me too' pricing when they see Harvard raise rates. Tufts, Vassar, Colby, Bates, Swarthmore all get the same applicants as the Ivies. They don't need to even offer a savings in cost compared to Harvard because they know a kid's family was already prepared to pay Harvard rates. It's a sick world, but Cornell and Northwestern were cheaper for me than Bowdoin and Middlebury. This has the worst affect of all on the rest of America as the private colleges in the rest of the nation raise rates because of the northeastern schools, and the public colleges of the northeast raise rates on out of state enrollees first then in-state kids and then the nationwide public rate rise happens. It is a ripple effect that eventually makes its way across the nation, leaving no college untouched.
This is an unspoken ripple effect of the FED's easy money policy that started in 2001. For years, elite schools could have covered every student with the interest off of their endowments. They never made a move to limit the cost to everyday Americans. We need to audit their books. We need to find out why small liberal arts colleges in the middle of nowhere with no new buildings have hiked tuition by 50% in a decade. College became expensive for one set of schools, but eventually made its way down the socioeconomic ladder, down the quality of school pyramid and across the nation. Easy money loans fed the beast and had the unfortunate side effect of being attached to students for life. It's not a conspiracy; it's just bad policy and the unintended consequences of easy money.

Thursday, December 13, 2012

Tarantino - World's Nerdiest Wigger

While I agree with the Chateau on many things, I completely disagree with calling Tarantino a sort of racial equivalent of a cuckold fetishist. He is absolutely not. He is the world's nerdiest wigger. He desperately wishes he were black. He is not writing his Django character to see a black kill whites. He is writing it because he wishes he were Django. Django is after all an idealized version of a black man. Does anyone really think a black guy, just granted his freedom, is going back through countless obstacles to save his black wife? Of course, they cast Kerry Washington in the role; Zoe Saldana was busy! I'd have an easier time believing a movie about 12 American Jews volunteering to fight in suicide missions in WW2. Tarantino wishes he were black, yet mentions some truths about blacks Hollywood avoids.

Tarantino admits to loving the '70s. He was born in '63, so his formative years were spent watching US pop culture of the '70s. The '70s were post-black liberation but before crack killed the black community + regular people started thinking blacks bring their problems on themselves. The '70s were that sweet spot with the best of black music, cool black hero films, black chicks being marketed as sexy to all, and the first black sitcoms. He has said in interviews how much he loved Pam Grier and thought she was the sexiest chick alive. Tarantino grew up without his father, so it is no surprise he might have sought a masculine role model in that cool image of the '70s black male ("Shaft", "Superfly", etc.). When Tarantino was promoting "Jackie Brown", he wore kangol hats, talked about smacking a black guy, and mentioned using the word "nigger". This was all right after the OJ trial, when the word became the "n-word" for whites. All of his movies have heavy '70s soundtracks and usually one cool black character. The other side of that coin is that he will write some anti-PC scenes like Dennis Hopper's "Sicilian" speech in "True Romance" and portray blacks in completely low life roles. No doctors, just gangsters. His love for the '70s black culture might allow him to portray them in truer form rather than the Hollywood idealized, Grey's Anatomy filter.

Tarantino isn't alone as he is the Hollywood version of Bill Simmons of ESPN. Simmons glorifies the NBA, jokes of three way romances with two black QBs, admits to calling himself Jabal as a child, and loves President Obama. Simmons is roughly Tarantino's age and also a child of divorce. Same era, similar childhood, and same sweet spot for portrayal of blacks. Simmons has had many moments where he has oddly attached himself to black culture, yet Simmons is also a wealthy white kid at heart and leaks out little bits that other sportswriters dodge. It's the same syndrome, just in a different realm. Tarantino and Simmons aren't alone because every white guy under 45 has one friend who either drunk or stoned has admitted, "I wish I was born black".

Monday, December 10, 2012

Nostalgia Cycles Inspired by "Crocodile Rock"

Does every song tell a story? Not quite. About 10 years ago, one of those cheesey compilation sets was marketed as story songs with tons of old country songs like "Old Rivers" and "North to Alaska". There were some awful songs in the set, but they all told a story. While I like to dig under the surface for what is the subterranean theme or story for plays, movies, and songs, sometimes it's fun just figuring out what the hell is going on in a song. What the fuck was Elton John telling us in "Crocodile Rock"? Crocodile Rock is a nonsensical sounding song that makes perfect sense if you think of the instrumentation's time stamp and read Bernie Taupin's lyrics. Like many successful bits of popular culture, it is a nostalgia piece.

Crocodile Rock's sound is organ heavy and reminiscent of those cheesey 50s and early 60s songs that used to dominate the Oldies stations in the 80s and early 90s. The outro just sounds like a song you'd twist to with your gal at the soda shop. It doesn't fit in the era of the song's release (1972). It's not in the style of Elton John's other songs. It's just strange. The lyrics tell the story. He remembers when rock was young, so we can argue that it is before Buddy Holly's death. Holly's death in 1959 was referred to as the "Day the Music Died". Another clue that it is in the '50s is that he and Suzy hold hands and skim stones. No premarital intercourse despite Suzy wearing her dresses tight. The Pill wasn't approved until the '60s. He does have an old gold Chevy and a place of his own, so he's over 18. The lyrics mention that other kids were rocking around the clock, referencing the Bill Haley song "Rock Around the Clock" released in '54. Another clue is later when John sings "long nights crying by the record machine, dreaming of my Chevy and my old blue jeans". Jeans did not become popular until the greaser culture spread in the mid 50s. Plus, he is saying old blue jeans because 1. the jeans of the early '70s were a totally different cut + style, and 2. he's older now and must wear slacks as an adult. I'd place the song as being about a 35 year old man in 1972 reminiscing about his days as a 20 year old greaser with his first love in 1957.

It's a song for the Silent Generation, despite being released as a pop-rock song during the Boomers peak years of young adulthood. It's a nostalgia, adult contempoary song about greasers who were off the popular mainstream track. It can work for Boomers in the general sense that everyone has a specific quirky musical genre that they identify with the period of time with their first taste of freedom and love. In retrospect, it's not really a surprise it was a hit since the musical "Grease" about the same subculture debuted in 1972. This is all part of the nostalgia cycle where what is considered the cool nostalgia of the current decade is what was cool 20 years earlier. Those teens and early 20-somethings need 20 years to age and become nostalgic. The nostalgia presents the past through a filtered lens, but the concepts are a skeleton to add current feelings and hazy memories to flesh out.

1970s nostalgia for the '50s - Happy Days, Grease, and the All in the Family refutation of the '60s idealism, MASH was set in the Korean war.
1980s nostalgia for the '60s and '40s - This nostalgia was really for the made up media shaped '60s that existed between '68-'74 (pre-disco + Carter). The clothes harkened back to early '60s and '40s styles between the suits, ties, women's more formal wear.
1990s nostalgia for '70s and '50s - Pulp Fiction and Swingers started the '70s and '50s crazes, but even the early grunge had more in common with hard arena rock of the '70s than '80s tunes. Gangsters in the hoods rehabbed old classic cars from the '70s. Films like Boogie Nights and The Ice Storm were '70s nostalgia fun. Here's a question: which decade was the nostalgia the strongest for in "Forrest Gump?"
2000s nostalgia for the '80s and 60s - "I love the '80s" specials, the greed is good attitude comeback, upbeat pop music dominated, bands like "The Killers" and "Franz Ferdinand" were derivative of an early '80s sound. The entire Democratic purging that started with Dean's internet campaign of late '03 was a nostalgia move for revitalizing the '60s feeling. At the school and consumer goods level, you might not believe how much they pushed the peace shit on kids. It was as bad as the enviro crap, which just changes each decade with whatever is the enviro-scare of the era. Obama's election was a chance for white Boomers and blacks to relive the '60s, but only the good part (rewarding a black guy who could speak well), not the mayhem and nationwide strife.

My guess about the 2010s is that hipster culture is a nostalgic echo for grunge and alternative '90s culture with some '70s added for good effect. I'd use any "Cake" music video from the '90s as evidence. Those guys were goddamn hipsters. "Super 8" glorified that late '70s world. The decade is young, so we will see. We live in a nostalgia heavy society that prices throwback sports uniforms over $200, stampedes malls for remade '80s Air Jordans, and spits out Betty Page wannabes from liberal arts campuses by the hundreds. I dont know why the double decade nostalgia, but maybe it has to do with people living older so they can be targeted consumers twice after their teen and early adulthood era. People used to die at 65 with little cash flow. Today's 60-something might be healthier and more self centered so they get caught up in that shit compared to older folks of yesteryear. The lack of cultural cohesion might prevent one decade from being the dominant decade of nostalgia (my money is on the '90s). Regardless of which decade wins, it is just another example of how widespread the disgust with the modern world is currently.