Ideological deviation at CERN

These are the power point slides that got Alessandro Frumia fired from CERN yesterday.

Naturally, he was fired from CERN that very day. CERN explains as follows:

CERN is a culturally diverse organisation bringing together people of many different nationalities. It is a place where everyone is welcome, and all have the same opportunities, regardless of ethnicity, beliefs, gender or sexual orientation. Indeed, diversity is one of the core values underpinning our Code of Conduct and the Organization is fully committed to promoting diversity and equality at all levels.

CERN always strives to carry out its scientific mission in a peaceful and inclusive environment.

CERN considers the presentation delivered by an invited scientist during a workshop on High Energy Theory and Gender as highly offensive. It has therefore decided to remove the slides from the online repository, in line with a Code of Conduct that does not tolerate personal attacks and insults.

The organisers from CERN and several collaborating universities were not aware of the content of the talk prior to the workshop. CERN supports the many members of the community that have expressed their indignation for the unacceptable statements contained in the presentation.

CERN is a culturally diverse organisation bringing together people of many different nationalities. It is a place where everyone is welcome, and all have the same opportunities, regardless of ethnicity, beliefs, gender or sexual orientation.

How can you be welcome, regardless of beliefs, and be fired for views that amount to beliefs? Easy. They just have to attack the idea that women are held back in physics because of some male conspiracy.

Different outcomes can only be explained by sexism and racism, never by differences in aptitudes, propensities and drives.

Question diversity.


Feminism is Bolshevism in Drag

In case you didn’t catch it, another of the illustrious feminist academics has been sounding off about the Kavanaugh lynching taking place in the US Congress.

The above-pictured “professor” from Georgetown Institution for the Insane, formerly Georgetown University, who looks like she fell off the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down, shows her true nature by calling for the death of white men and feeding their corpses to swine. Umm. The tolerance! The compassion! I’m overwhelmed by the empathy.

It may sound a far cry from Bolshevism but bear with me here. Revolutions that seek to destroy the foundations of society, not simply take over the government, are Bolshevist in nature. The French Revolution, while proclaiming liberty, equality and fraternity, attempted to destroy religion and the family in the name of “reason”, resulted in a very few years in tyranny, dictatorship and mass murder. Even Napoleon was a liberating influence after the nightmare of the Terror.

The communist revolution in Russia was the same; the Bolsheviks attempted to erase religion, the family, civic society, everything on which Western Civilization is built. All culture, and learning itself, was to be annihilated. (See the excellent book The Mind and Face of Bolshevism). The result here was millions of dead in slave labor camps, mass repression and a secret police state.

Scratch a progressive, and underneath erupts a nascent tyrant. Witness the spite and deranged ranting of this so-called professor.  It’s this kind of people who do more to poison the relations between the sexes than any others. If these people do come to power, the result will be the same as before–repression, murder and tyranny. Here’s her tweet [from The College Fix]:

Look at thus[sic] chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist’s arrogated entitlement.
All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine? Yes.
— (((Christine Fair))) (@CChristineFair) September 29, 2018

Clicking on the date reveals “Account suspended”. I wonder why.

Even more astounding is that the media and universities in the US tolerate this poisonous drivel and this creature actually has a job indoctrinating unfortunate students. But, the US does have the Second Amendment and I am sure that many Americans will be thanking God for that if any of this mob of deranged degenerates comes close to power.

Rebel Yell

More on the genetic basis of everything

David Reich, a geneticist, wrote in a recent New York Times op ed the following:

I am worried that well-meaning people who deny the possibility of substantial biological differences among human populations are digging themselves into an indefensible position, one that will not survive the onslaught of science. I am also worried that whatever discoveries are made — and we truly have no idea yet what they will be — will be cited as “scientific proof” that racist prejudices and agendas have been correct all along, and that those well-meaning people will not understand the science well enough to push back against these claims.

This is why it is important, even urgent, that we develop a candid and scientifically up-to-date way of discussing any such differences, instead of sticking our heads in the sand and being caught unprepared when they are found.

Also covered at :

And in response to this, Andrew Sullivan wrote:

Last weekend, a rather seismic op-ed appeared in the New York Times, and it was for a while one of the most popular pieces in the newspaper. It’s by David Reich, a professor of genetics at Harvard, who carefully advanced the case that there are genetic variations between subpopulations of humans, that these are caused, as in every other species, by natural selection, and that some of these variations are not entirely superficial and do indeed overlap with our idea of race. This argument should not be so controversial — every species is subject to these variations — and yet it is. For many on the academic and journalistic left, genetics are deemed largely irrelevant when it comes to humans. Our large brains and the societies we have constructed with them, many argue, swamp almost all genetic influences….


(Vox editor Ezra) Klein cannot seem to hold the following two thoughts in his brain at the same time: that past racism and sexism are foul, disgusting, and have wrought enormous damage and pain and that unavoidable natural differences between races and genders can still exist.

I know this is a touchy, fraught, difficult subject. I completely understand the reluctance to discuss it, and the hideous history of similar ideas in the past. But when people seeking the truth are immediately targeted for abuse and stigma, it matters. When genetics are in a golden age, when neuroscience is maturing as a discipline, and when the truth about these things will emerge soon enough, it matters that we establish a liberalism that is immune to such genetic revelations, that can strive for equality of opportunity, and can affirm the moral and civic equality of every human being on the planet. Liberalism has never promised equality of outcomes, merely equality of rights. It’s a procedural political philosophy rooted in means, not a substantive one justified by achieving certain ends.

That liberalism is integral to our future as a free society — and it should not falsely be made contingent on something that can be empirically disproven. It must allow for the truth of genetics to be embraced, while drawing the firmest of lines against any moral or political abuse of it. When that classical liberalism is tarred as inherently racist because it cannot guarantee equality of outcomes, and when scientific research is under attack for revealing the fuller truth about our world, we are in deep trouble. Because we are robbing liberalism of the knowledge and the moderation it will soon desperately need to defend itself.

What Sullivan concludes is true. The Left is only interested in science to the extent it appears to support their preconceived notions, not because they have the slightest regard for the scientific process, which involves rational skepticism and full debate. The Left cannot abide the notion that we are not somehow infinitely plastic and only made unequal but human institutions. Science is not on their side.


Good bye, Dr. Couillard



Everywhere I looked yesterday, which was election day in Quebec, factories, dairies, and shops had signs saying “nous embauchons” – we are hiring.  Despite the surge of employment and investment , the people of Quebec decided to replace the governing Liberals under Phillippe Couillard, a former thoracic surgeon, with  Francois Legault, of Coalition Avenir Quebec. The CAQ is said to be “populist” but what that might mean in the Quebec context is less than clear, since Quebec politics is always “populist”.

French Canada takes for granted that the purpose of politics is the preservation and enhancement of the French Canadian nation, to which all other considerations are subordinate. I frequently describe Quebec politics as “national socialism without the interesting uniforms” but like many a good jab it is unfair to say so. There is no secret police, totalizing ideology, or lack of personal tolerance, yet the shared and assumed goal is that politics has no other purpose.

When nationalism of this kind is even suggested, let alone practised, in English Canada and the United States, it is denounced by all enlightened opinion. Hence Trump and his opposition. But nationalism is taken for granted in Quebec. Thus the idea that Quebec is following any trend started elsewhere is rubbish. Maybe the rest of North America is catching up to Quebec.

I have not seen Quebec look so prosperous since I was a teenager in the 1960s. Huge factories and industrial installations are being erected near highways. I see projects abandoned since the 1970s that are under construction again.

After 15 years of Liberal government, I understand why the Quebecois decided to end the provincial Liberal regime. Clearly they did so without concern that the prosperity would fail to continue under the new guys.

I have remarked in various postings over the past year or so that Quebec’s forty year long bad mood is over. Maybe this is another sign that this is so. Let us hope the CAQ continues the drive to prosperity. After forty years of economic decline, of and people being depressed and rude, prosperity and happiness make a welcome change.


The Democrat Party as “The Thing”

For those of you who are fans of John Carpenter’s horror masterpiece The Thing, the transformation of the husky dog that runs into an Antarctic base pursued by apparently crazy Norwegians must be indelibly etched in the mind. In the pound, at night, the dog, amid shrieks and growls, turns into a seething mass of alien protoplasm, absorbing the other dogs into its hellish organism. Approaching the metamorphosing creature, one of the terrified crew stammers, “…I don’t know what it is, b..but it’s weird and pissed off.”

Which brings me, naturally enough, to the Democrat Party. What, ostensibly, is, or was, a political party in the US, has, during the recent Hate-In surrounding the confirmation process of a Supreme Court nominee, exposed its inner nature as a something resembling an alien organism built to consume humans.

Not content with mundane lies, innuendo, smear and character assassination form the modus operandi of the Democrats on the committees. Dredging up some pseudo-psychologist from the distant past, who can produce not even a coherent memory of anything, crying, posturing, whining and self-pity apparently are now evidence for damning a man (only a man, never a woman) and destroying his character.

Further, the ignorant mobs shouting, screaming and disrupting the proceedings, are welcomed and tolerated by the Democrats, indeed, egged on to further mischief. Republican senators are harassed and hounded in public places and restaurants by thugs. A mockery is made of due process.

When this happens, the end of constitutional government is not far off. In a free society it is self-restraint that protects all, not just from the violence of others, but from the violence of government. Even a mob will not tolerate chaos; tyranny will be the result.

What type of people engage in this activity? What types are the left and socialists in general? What is the political protoplasm that forms the ichor of leftism?

Return to the wisdom of Gustave le Bon for an analysis of the leftist personality and the deplorable actions of these people are rendered in all their repugnant clarity. In The Psychology of Socialism over one hundred years ago, le Bon writes of the leaders of socialism and anarchism as demi-savants

I apply the term demi-savant to those who have no
other knowledge than that contained in books, and who
consequently know absolutely nothing of the realities of
life. They are the product of our schools and universities,
those lamentable factories of degeneration whose disastrous
effects have been exposed by Taine, Paul Bourget,
and many others. A professor, a scholar, or a graduate of
one of our great colleges is always for years, and often all
his life, nothing but a demi-savant.
It is from the ranks of the demi-savant, and notably
from the ranks of unemployed licentiates and bachelors
of the universities, outcasts from society whom the State
has been unable to place, ushers discontented with their
lot, university professors who find their merits overlooked,
that the most dangerous disciples of Socialism are recruited,
and even the worst Anarchists.

And what of the mob on the streets? Who are the leftists, the followers, the street rabble? Mostly, they are…

Social failures, misunderstood geniuses, lawyers without
clients, writers without readers, doctors without
patients, professors ill-paid, graduates without employment,
clerks whose employers disdain them for their
insufficiency, puffed-up university instructors—these are
the natural adepts of Socialism. In reality they care very
little for doctrines. Their dream is to create by violent
means a society in which they will be the masters.

We are seeing this unfold now in the US, and shortly thereafter it will happen in other countries. To stop the descent into anarchy, good men have to stand up and fight it. Watching the sad spectacle of the Democrats going insane on TV, Mrs Rebel Yell added drily, “…they only seem to be motivated by hate, anger and malice.” Need I add more?

One final blast from the great man…

If one were to review the parts played by the various
classes in the dissolution of society among [the Latin]
peoples, one would say that the doctrinaires and malcontents
manufactured by the universities act above all
by attacking ideals, and are, by reason of the intellectual
anarchy they give rise to, one of the most corrosive factors
of destruction ; the middle classes help the downfall by
their indifference, their egotism, their feeble will, and
their absence of initiative or political perception ; the
lower classes act in a revolutionary manner by seeking to
destroy, so soon as it shall be sufficiently undermined,
the edifice which is tottering on its foundations.

Yet again, another illustration that, in politics, there is nothing new under the Sun.

Rebel Yell

Refresher course: The constrained and unconstrained vision


Thomas Sowell has spent a life time fighting the unconstrained vision which, crudely, comes down to “I know best and there is no institution that should stand in my way of doing good as I conceive it”. The sincerity and passion with which they hold their view is the guarantor of its truth. “Man is born free, and yet everywhere he is in chains” said Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Only bad institutions make us behave badly. Since man is the creature of social arrangements, if we change the institutions we will change man, for the better. Nothing prevents us from the attainment of this goal except reactionaries, people of ill-will, ignorance, and the forces of evil.

Sowell, on the subject of sincerity in politics:

“People who have the constrained vision will understand that people make mistakes. and so therefore when someone says something the disagree with,…they see no need to question his sincerity, his honesty or whatever. But for those with the unconstrained vision, what they believe seems so obviously true, that of you are standing in the way of it, either you must be incredibly stupid, utterly uninformed, or simply dishonest.” (at minute 24 of the interview)

Hence, in the days when I still watched broadcast television, I saw the three political party reps talking about gay marriage (as I recall). The little faggot from the NDP [there is no more swiftly accurate designator] was insisting “we shouldn’t even be debating this”. His views exactly typified why normal people find leftists so intolerant.

And that is how it is with everything on the Left. We should not even be debating this, when what they think should not be debated is precisely what should be debated.


George Gilder thinks that Google is run by delusional brilliant Marxists

George Gilder was right about a lot of really important things, including especially the future of the computer, the one that you now hold in your hand, called the smartphone. You have forgotten how revolutionary that prediction was in 1990 when he published “The Death of Television”. Some of you were not even born then, I suppose.

Now Gilder has published another significant book, predicting the demise of Google, or at least its dominance.

Gilder observes that by supplying things for free, Google avoids many problems that arise from payment, including the obligation to provide security, to a great extent. Worse, Google avoids the learning process that is acquired with capitalist transactions.

He considers that blockchain technologies will fix much of what is ailing in America. [In this I remain skeptical, but hopeful as well.]

“They [the Silicon Valley apostolate] have a business plan and solutions which are inappropriate to the human mind”. He sees the human mind as the essential source of value, and that Google and cloud-dependent technologies are over-centralized. “Blockchain is an answer to the cloud mind”.

The number of IPOs has been falling, the number of companies on the stock market has also been falling. Consistently with Peter Thiel’s thesis, we do not seem to be getting the innovation that we ought. According to Gilder, the invention of Etherium has halted this decline.

Consequently he takes issue with Ray Kurzweil,  the guy thinks we are approaching a singularity of machine intelligence. Says Gilder, “if you don’t understand consciousness, you don’t understand thinking. Thinking doesn’t produce consciousness, consciousness produces thinking. All these computer scientists are trying to explain away consciousness….To say, oh well, we don’t know what consciousness is, but our computers will compute so fast that it wont matter, that consciousness will emerge like one of their clouds, is I think, one their fundamental vanities of the [Silicon] Valley”.

“What I am against, as Bill Buckley used to call it, ‘immanentizing the eschaton‘; imagining some technology that you came up with last week will end the human adventure, that will subsume all our minds in the clouds, governed by eight giant companies in China and the US, with a few nerds in Israel contributing all the new ideas. This is the vision that I don’t think is going to prevail. I think the human adventure will continue after Google.”

Amen to that, brother.

At 79 years of age, George Gilder speaks as if he were suffering from some neurological ailment that I am not qualified or able to diagnose. Yet he remains a formidable thinker, a seer. I like him. He believes that in principle, machines cannot think, and I agree with him. He foresees the end of the dominance of the current masters of the universe, and how it may come about. He has addressed a vital issue of public interest in Life after Google. Curiously, paradoxically, Gilder reminds me of Timothy Leary, the acid apostle, by his great optimism, but unlike Leary George Gilder is grounded in a formidable mind


I was Kavanaughed



At some point in my university career, I was selected to replace the leftist management of the campus newspaper. A campaign of distortion, lies and vilification thereupon was unleashed such as I have never before or since received. I was sunk into a dark abyss of personal abuse. Hysterical little creeps running around calling you a fascist, racist, warmonger are as unpleasant as you can conceive. To be the subject of total lies, as I believe that Kavanaugh has been, must be insufferable, and yet he must endure it.

I wonder how this will affect his life as a judge. Here is a man who has followed all the rules and succeeded in life. Now he is subject to abusive crap in the New Yorker about the sin of having a bunch of male friends who are supposed to have protected him. What protection? Indeed, as many an author is now realizing, we are in 1984, we are in Oceania. This is so even if we have not undergone any formal change of our political or constitutional arrangements.

No law is cited against Kavanaugh. He supposedly put his had over a girl’s mouth at a party when he was 17 and she was 15 and rubbed up against her. Can you imagine, all you males, ever having behaved this way between 15 and 21? Can you imagine, all you females, ever having repelled the unwanted physical advances of some over eager and loutish young male? In consequence the supposed victim had to go off to Hawaii and live a life of recovery and wellness therapy.

Now imagine if, as a thought experiment, nothing of the kind had happened? Imagine being the centre of this vilification. Imagine his wife and children enduring their father and their husband’s vilification. There is no life so blameless that a leftist will not seek to destroy it.

Thus, when Brett Kavanaugh is eventually confirmed, imagine how much vengeance he will feel in his heart towards his abusers. Imagine him acting on this feeling for the next 25 years. So you can see why the Left is desperate to derail his approval by the Senate. They know what awaits them.

I am reaching the stage where I will punch an abusive leftist in the face in social situations. I think social, not civil, war is upon us. They have brought it on themselves and they must suffer the consequences.