Are these anti-Israel (and I would say anti-Semitic -- sometimes there's a difference, but perhaps not in this far-right case) conspiracy theories gaining traction? I even briefly saw Megyn Kelly (a hitherto respectable right-wing personality) devote an entire segment to discussing Candace Owens and some tie that she had drawn to Israel. I didn't watch, but that video garnered like 400K views in just a couple of hours, so anti-Semitism is extremely spicy and draws huge numbers of views. All these videos draw like 10x the number of views if not more compared to, say, any FOX News video. When there were JFK or Soviet Union conspiracies, that's one thing, but increasingly widespread anti-Semitic conspiracy theories unfortunately signal an eternal pattern, which remains ever-present.
There is a weird overlap bw conspiracy theorists and Jew haters—the world's most popular conspiracy theory is probably still "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"—probably because the Jews are both the despised Other yet also sprinkled liberally throughout the upper echelons of govt, finance, business, law, arts, academia etc.
Conspiracy theories are irresistible catnip to Jew haters because they provide a way for angry, miserable losers to offload their resentment onto an outgroup—thus not getting that job or into that school isn't because of your own failure, but because of powerful unseen nefarious forces that "control the world".
Conspiracy theories offer a simplistic and essentially gnostic worldview that replaces reason and empiricism with a fairy tale that magically transforms the conspiracist from creepy weirdo into someone blessed with higher knowledge, above and apart from the rest of us.
Apparently it is customary to believe that "conspiracy theories" are by definition false. However, conspiracies occur.
Consider the 2020 election.
On 4 February 2021, Time Magazine published confessions by participants, written by Molly Ball, entitled "The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election". https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/
Mollie Hemingway's book _Rigged_ documented more manipulations.
On 15 May 2025, Steve Sailer posted an editorial about the Pfizer company’s withholding vax-test information that would have helped the Trump campaign. https://www.stevesailer.net/p/a-smoking-gun
The manipulations are in addition to allegations of election fraud, although those are mentioned in Mollie Hemingway's book.
I'm not sure these rise to the level of conspiracy for me.
The Pfizer issue I would consider simple (if devious) corruption and the Ball piece shows a massive and massively funded campaign by our globalist ownership class to make sure they did all they could (legally and quasi) to make sure that the Orange Beast wasn't re-elected. Having various oligarchs like Zuckerberg fund and coordinate political activists is more hard ball, civil war-type politics than a secret cabal planning a conspiracy. Also, as much of it was public knowledge at the time, like the push for mail-in voting, this doesn't strike me as rising to the level of conspiratorial—though I admit on this issue, it's a fine line.
Here's the simple definition I just took from Wikipedia: "A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy (generally by powerful sinister groups, often political in motivation), when other explanations are more probable."
My idea of a prototypical conspiracy theory is something like the "9/11 was an inside job" idea, which relies on retroactive cherry-picking of facts combined with insane unproven (and unproveable) claims, like the buildings next to the WTC were wired for explosives, planted by some combo of CIA and Mossad. Then there's also all the conspiracy theories whenever a public figure meets an untimely end, like Princess Di or Tupac or that recent cluster of Germany AfD politics who all seemed to die in a bunch.
As you can tell, and I confess my bias, I am more of a partisan of Ockham's and Hanlon's Razors, and have never met a conspiracy theory that didn't seem a bit cracked to me.
Funny, I know lots of Jewish Tea Party members. In The Villages in Florida, they are quite prominent. I've spoken to nearly 100 of these groups. You're ignorant of what they are. And I had exactly one instance of anti-Catholicism when I spoke, and the group leader immediately apologized and told me the man was getting Alzheimers and was unpredictable. They didn't throw him out due to kindness, and then I always introduced myself as a Papist and took many questions about the Church's own rules regarding politics versus faith. I worked with successful blue-collar businessmen losing their careers to illegals, also film-makers, retired professors, and many other professionals. Pretty sleazy comment, Mister Clever.
Neither of my comments said anything about the Tea Party or about Catholicism. I really have no idea what you're referring to. Are you sure you replied to the right person?
I'm a technological dolt. I didn't even know I had email through my school until I had thousands and thousands of emails. My husband had to coax me to start blogging by designing a screen page that looked like a typewriter. Yet I come from an IBM family and even owned their first portable computer, which had three lines of text and weighed at least 50 pounds. They had a tough transition for several years back then.
I don't use X much, just to follow Laurence Fox and Tommy Robinson. I'm dismayed by this. But it goes to show, when you legitimate and fund an unskilled attention-seeker such as Owens, you often get what you deserve.
Social media is a bugbear to me. Do you think she is still this popular after her meltdown, or that people just don't bother to remove her from their "following" list? Do you know if she still does tv and public speeches?
The take economy means people need to have instant reactions to things, and it’s better if those reactions upend the conventional wisdom. Ideally nothing should be what it seems.
For example, Matt Walsh seems to be a smart guy but even he is speculating that the shooter had some convoluted plot to exculpate his boyfriend by… texting him about the shooting, because Walsh had seen something similar on “Breaking Bad”.
Tucker Carlson thinks most major political figures are gay, apart from Pete Buttigieg, who’s just pretending.
Candace Owens thinks Brigitte Macron is a man, just for the hell of it I guess, or because the Michelle Obama theory was getting old.
There's so much competition now for a fractured audience. Plus, there's no set time to watch them daily. In a media free for all, the strangest take takes the cake.
I think a common low-status or working-class reflex has always been “they’re all liars/crooks/pervs”, believed with more or less sincerity according to the situation. Now that everyone’s online and in control of their clicks that view gets catered to a lot more explicitly than it used to.
An idiot's $1 has the exact same value as a normal person's $1, and the idiot is more easily parted from his money. Catering to idiots seems like a no-brainer.
Steve: you actually believe that fabricated text chain between the "killer" and his "boyfriend?" Nobody is buying that ridiculous text chain that outlines everything in detail in an organized way.
I buy it to the extent that it was produced by Robinson and his lover rather than by anybody else. I am less convinced that it was an entirely spontaneous exchange.
Right. I wouldn't be shocked by a two man conspiracy to exonerate the nonshooter.
The cops could test this with phone records. If they were sitting in the same room at the time they were texting, then it's a set-up. Did they talk on the phone before the text messages? Did they exchange emails before?
I thought they were hundreds of miles apart. How easy is it to change time stamps on texts? The NSA should be able to verify the signal traffic, right?
"Dad’s conclusion: Of course Sirhan did it. It was perhaps the clearest case he’d ever analyzed."
So then the final question remains: Sirhan was standing right in front of RFK when he fired the shots, and yet ballistics proved that RFK was killed by bullets fired from behind him. So that doesn't appear to be so open and shut.
Also, the newer released JFK files strongly suggest a CIA role in JFK's assassination, when for well over a half century, the public was officially told that the CIA played no direct or indirect role in JFK's death. Certain members of the Mafia have long intimated that they also had a hand in JFK's death as well. Perhaps one day, one day at least, uh, Oliver Stone will get an official apology from the established MSM, historians etc who insisted that he wasn't much more than a nutcase in asking sincere questions as in: Was JFK truly assassinated by a single person and there's no one else involved? If that was truly the case, then the Warren Commission files should've been released within the first decade on from '64, and the government should've been fully transparent about the case, as oppose to the "nothing to see here, folks! Keep it moving. And if anyone dares ask sincere questions and express skepticism about the official narrative, then you're the crackpot and conspiracy nut (the term conspiracy case was first coined by the CIA in the mid 60's to in part, silence opposition those from asking questions regarding the official narratives, such as about those concerning JFK)
Absolutley. That JFK was shot at from the back, and that 20 odd medical staff attested to that but weren't allowed to speak at the inquiry has been made crystal clear recently.
A CIA cover up is quite certain. Who they were covering up we have no advance on.
But in a free society, the public should've been permitted to expand the inquiry and discover the extent of the CIA's role, their motive, and, IF any foreign nation was also involved and if so, to what extent that they were?
It's getting more difficult to claim with a straight face in 2025 that Oswald acted alone on his own, that there wasn't any individual, group, etc behind him at all whatsoever.
It's not going to wash, and in the interests of transparency, the public should be permitted to examine these routes no matter where it may take them. After all, what does the Deep State have to hide that they don't want others to discover regarding JFK's death?
And all they had to do was originally release all the files back in the '60s and demonstrate transparency as well as that they are, at the end of the day, public servants (they work for the people, and not the other way around).
They made this very claim for decades. In the mid 90's there was a propagandistic tome "Case Closed" by Richard Posner who claimed with a straight face that Oswald acted completely on his own with no help from anyone and no one backing him, period.
What Steve apparently seems to ignore, or prefers not to notice, is that sometimes, "conspiracy theories" are actually closer to finding the truth of established events than are the established narratives fed to the public by the powers that be (e.g. "the official version of how it all went down").
The emphasis here is on the word "sometimes", and not all the times. Sometimes the conspiracists get it right.
Sometimes they do, and when this happens, the trails should be followed until accuracy is found. One day, Oliver Stone is going to be received as sounding the warning light and in his own way, helped to urge the public to demand that the JFK files be released. While obviously there are still more files to release (as well as files that may likely have been destroyed), at the end of the day, Mr Stone helped contribute to getting to the bottom of one of the more horrific assassinations of the 20th Century.
Because the longer the powers that be continue to stonewall and stall and demonstrate a total lack of transparency, then the question becomes louder and louder with each passing decade: what exactly are they trying to hide and cover up? And of course, who benefits by continuing the deception on the public?
The difference is the recent release of materials that found a large number of medical staff (17?) had been interviewed and said the wounds were consistent with a bullet from the back. Yet not a single one of them were presented to the inquiry which claimed only the shooter from the front.
Ergo CIA covered up the conspiracy of other shooters is now FACT not reasonably suspiscion.
But there were things that the Warren Commission were presented with at the time and they chose to ignore, minimize or simply not include in the final report. Certain things even in the 60's were well known and they chose to ignore it.
Don't know if you should tell Steve about this point, as it does appear that he sincerely believes that RFK was assassinated without any doubt whatsoever by Sirhan Sirhan.
Oliver Stone - the Untold History of the United States is a heroic work explaining the difference between the real truth about Star Wars, the Death star and the Galactic Empire as opposed to the frequently told story of Star Trek, and the USS Enterprise boldly seeking for good deeds to do.
Only when one has seen the Untold version can one sensible understand how US has acted in say Syria, or how Russia and China can be seen by most countries as the good guys.
Not entirely sure if this is sarcasm or sincere seriousness. Is this "No Doy" as we used to say?
But on JFK at least, Mr Stone was accurately correct.
What remains fascinating though is that for most of the entire Cold War, the liberal Left consistently downplayed the atrocities of the USSR; in some instances, they actively supported the USSR's leaders. However, once the Soviet Union fell and Putin (specifically) came to power, then it was Katie Bar the Door and Russia has been the Devil Incarnate.
for the Left, socialism from a globalist perspective was just fine; but nationalism remains the true evil.
After all, there aren't many US Leftists that actively support China nor it's policies, or at least they haven't been vocal about supporting China in decades. Wonder why not? China isn't capitalist, it certainly isn't a white nation--in that sense it checks off the cool Politically Correct boxes. If one wants to make a case that China doesn't have a pure record on human rights, that never prevented the Left from supporting the USSR, Cuba, and other nations that had just as horrific record, (if not worse) on human rights.
So why doesn't the Left actively and publicly support China? Non-white, and not capitalist system of government. What's not to support, especially as the Left routinely supported such nations in their past. Could it be...that the Left is mostly racist in whom they choose to support, and hence they can 't support a non-white nation such as China?
Our domestic intelligence agencies were pretty much destroyed by Eric Holder, and I put nothing past him, nor Elena Kagan. Clinton, Holder, and Kagan were quite a team, and none of them stupid. Obama bringing them back in from the cold was one of the worst acts of his presidency.
Believe that and the Deep State will tell ya another one.
Occam's Razor = there was another shooter, standing right behind RFK.
But once again, this demonstates that the Deep State has no interest in being transparent with the citizenry regarding the horrendous deaths of public officials.
Richard Hanania is right. The Republican Party is, sadly, moving downstream and starting to attract fewer white collar professionals from elite universities and more…people who are intrigued by the scintillating theories of Joe Rogan, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes regarding vaccines, dragons, the Rothschilds, secret transgenders, 2020 election fraud, etc.
Trump contributed to this, but I think the upcoming Marjorie Taylor Greene era will be far worse than the Trump era.
The future modal Republican voter isn’t a white guy who reads the WSJ, it’s a mixed-race/nonwhite guy who gets his info from Nick Fuentes podcast clips. (Not even the full podcast, just Twitter and TikTok clips.)
17 years ago, Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam wrote “Grand New Party” without seeming to realize that making the GOP more working class would also make it dumber. They spoke about it last year in a pretty humorously oblivious conversation.
Similarly, smart Jewish Dems seem increasingly to be held captive by the racial special interests they’ve encouraged. (In England the Labour Party is planning to recognize Palestinian statehood as a sop to Muslim voters.)
Ignorance of IQ bell curves has a lot to answer for.
The votes of the working class count just as much as anyone else's. The issue is that once you get a reputation for being the Stupid Party, smart people such as myself won't want to officially join even if they are sympathetic to your cause. I have now voted for Trump multiple times but I'm still a Democrat because I would be embarrassed to publicly identify myself as a Republican
If by "social cohort" you mean "society writ large", I agree. Whenever I see I dumb white person they invariably vote Republican. Lion of the Blogosphere*, who is an anti-Trump rightist, just explicitly made the point that the left is higher-IQ than the right, although he left out of the racial qualifier which would have made his pointer stronger, if more contentious...
Yeah, intellects like sodden William Buckley, who wanted his own little serial killer after Norman Mailer had one. I don't have much positive to say about Mailer, but at least he apologized to the victim's family the next time the guy he got released. Buckley, meanwhile, fell so hard for his own little pet who bashed women and girls' skulls in that he refused to respond when police requested the record of their correspondence after Buckley got sprung the very bloody sicko, including details about other crimes against females.
I'd beat him with a sack of oranges if he was alive today. Imagine Norman Mailer being higher on the low end of the ethical chart than Buckley.
"Society writ large" has a mean IQ of 97. The perception of Republicans as "stupid" is a bias of people from the chattering and FIRE classes, like underemployed Jewish lawyers living in New York City. Again, with the Democratic parties' most loyal constituencies being sub-90 IQ ethnic minorities, members of public employee unions, and women with purple hair, it's hilarious to read urbanites declaring the Republican party beneath them.
I hold advanced degrees, and the laborers I worked with for years could run intellectual, acquisition of new skills, and intellectual circles around them.
Academia and its products have been degraded for a long time. What did you do to stop it?
This goes WAY back. Once upon a time Americans were offered the choice of either a bloated welfare state or ever more concentration of wealth in the hands of the super rich. Back in the 70s the only people broaching the idea that we could have something approximating Thomas Jefferson's yeoman dominated small government society were the conspiracy theorists, especially the John Birch Society. "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" sold five million copies.
Donald Trump is trying to make the Republican Party more working class friendly. So of course he panders to the conspiracy theorists. Millions of votes of people who agree with his agenda more or less -- vs. the Lavender RINOs who just want their special tax breaks.
Part of my current project is trying to make a populist agenda more NPR friendly. The termite charts and blaming the Rockefellers and Rothchilds for everything detracts for the real story. Deficit spending is a direct subsidy for the already rich. Borrowing from the capital pool is no different from buying up cheese to support farmers. Tax free foundations inevitably end up in the hands of leftists. Who wants to take up a career of giving away a rich person's money? Leftists! As for the idea that billionaires could be cool with socialism, just look around! It's a different set of billionaires, but they same dynamic.
Trump V2 is succeeding this time around because he has thinktank support. If you look through my posts on Substack you will find that the Trump administration is "stealing" my ideas left and right.
I am not taking credit. Heritage has a bunch of smart people coming to similar conclusions, and RFK Jr. is filling in much of the rest.
Think NPR and PBS from 40+ years ago. Still, an overall left bias (especially NPR) but nowhere near as strident and dishonest as today.
PBS had Wall St. Week, Firing Line and The McLaughlin Group. Milton Friedman did the documentary series Free To Choose on PBS.
What never happened was the equivalent of Free to Choose from the populist viewpoint. There were no populists capable of making their cases without sinking into conspiracy theories unworthy of PBS.
Let's try a concrete example. Trump has been framing the tariff argument in terms of winners and losers. He talks about other countries taking advantage of us, etc. Very much schoolyard dynamics rhetoric. Works for some. Does not work for those who think they understand economics. The textbooks teach Comparative Advantage, etc. therefore Trump is a moron.
Well, the old textbooks don't take into account the modern welfare state and income taxes. They are truly obsolete. Need to directly attack the obsolete textbooks. I did so a few years back here: https://rulesforreactionaries.substack.com/p/free-trade-isnt
Power is just as important as wealth. Probably more so. Fauci is not THAT rich, and he never had electoral mandate, but boy did he have power! Whatever you can tell about wealth, there is always a huge power inequality, particularly in the "socialist" countries.
Some power as long as you keep your nose clean. As one has seen during Russian revolution, or the 3rd Reich, even great wealth doesn't protect you that much.
GOP turned downward out of necessity, because the cleverer guys are now all indoctrinated by leftist universities. Until GOP founds new fully conservative universities with conservative faculty, this isn't going to change.
Lots of people went through leftist universities and came out voting straight ticket republican for decades until in their 40s they decided the gop was too stupid for their votes and money.
A lot of academics live in their ivory towers and are cuddled because they can do symbolic operations well. At the same time they frequently lack in street smarts. Essentially, there are two different "intelligences" that don't correlate well.
Pardon my Anglo-Saxon but, fuck the professional class (of which I am a member).
They are effete, rent-seeking, striver snobs and deracinated, soulless zombies.
They lap up all the crackpot, unscientific droppings from their elite betters--transgenderism, global warming, blank slate egalitarianism--like kittens and cream behind walls of high property values.
They despise their countrymen, the ones who are first responders and utility and construction tradesmen and have the highest occupational fatalities, and want them replaced.
Adrian Vermeule, Christopher Caldwell, Victor Davis Hanson, James Howard Kunstler, JD Vance, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie: none of these people are intellectual slouches and they are on Team Trump. Maybe you should be?
Adrian V wants to establish a Catholic theocracy in the United States. Aside from the tolerance of priestly pedophilia, you also have the down side of reducing us to Latin American economic and scientific primitivism. No thanks!
Adrian V was also advocating for snatching Jewish babies, baptizing them and raising them as Catholics... There was a major clash on First Things about that, IIRC
Also the Kochs. Remember David Koch ran for Vice President in 1980 with an open-borders policy so extreme that the NYTimes criticized it.
Later, while they were astroturfing the the Tea Party to deligitimize it, they made their group leaders sign non-disclosers that were iron-tight. They forgot to give me one, so I pretty singularly can tell the truth about them. So I stayed with them throughout 2012 in Florida, watched them, and then did podcasts about them with Cliff Kincaid that were removed from the web. I have some pretty sick stories about how they shut up any discussion of immigration by Tea Partiers at risk of firing and lawsuits. Rubio is their bag boy. I hate to see him with Trump. They also support no prisons and legalization of all drugs and have more recently partnered with Soros' Open Society network and declared they would be voting Democrat. I've listened to Slade O'Brian, now their national head of "grassroots organizing," blind drunk at ten a.m. talking about how dumb Tea Partiers are and how easy it is to make them submissive and obedient. Do not let AFP or their other fake organizations anywhere near you. Above all, avoid their "Five for Five" paperwork. It silences you while claiming credit for your group's work.
Most of their internal staff comes from the Bush family borg.
> The Republican Party is, sadly, moving downstream and starting to attract fewer white collar professionals from elite universities and more…people who are intrigued by the scintillating theories of Joe Rogan, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes regarding vaccines, dragons, the Rothschilds, secret transgenders, 2020 election fraud, etc.<
Compared to ...
-- "diversity is our greatest strength"
-- "nation of immigrants"
-- grrrl power!
-- structural racism
-- gay "marriage"
-- China can make everything and we'll be fine with "services"--i.e. selling our assets and government debt
-- "must have immigration!" (an obvious stupidity Hanania is huge proponent of)
-- gay "marriage"
-- "people who menstruate"
-- "gender assigned at birth"
-- "George Floyd was murdered"
-- "open borders"
and of course
-- "race is a social construct" and "race does not exist"
There is stupid--agreed--and there's *stupid*--as in real nation and civilization ending stupid.
Speak for youself. I have advanced degrees and prefer manual labor, which is intellectual in its own way. And you have no idea how much more the average mechanic makes compared with the average adjunct, who make up about 90% of all higher education instructors.
The left (and especially women) is a big believer in social proof as a sign of correctness, i.e. they take the word "proof" in "social proof" literally. This doesn't make them low-IQ per se, though
I disagree. I've spent plenty of time in academia and the Tea Party. The latter, I toured on my own dime mostly, trying to teach these normal and perfectly intelligent people how difficult it is to discern bullshitters in politics. If they were naive, it was a function of being civil and having spent their lives raising kids, volunteering, going to church, holding non-political jobs being stolen by illegals, and being called assholes by the likes of you. And academia, which is a literal cesspool.
It's pretty incredible. Trump 1.0 explicitly pursued the Sailer strategy, appealing to the country's still-white majority but I don't think Steve has ever acknowledged this.
Trump 2.0 pursued what could be called the Sailer strategy (rev. 2024), recognizing that black and latino men don't like getting lectured by liberal white women about gender fluidity either. Gets more of the black and latino vote than ever. Flips back every State that turned in the flawed, opaque, and statistically non-credible 2020 election.
I'm told Sailer is no intellectual slouch, and Team Trump has actually been following his advice, and still get no credit for it.
If Hanania thinks he's so smart, then he can get together with Bill Kristol and David French and figure out how to pull the rug out from under all those MAGA rubes.
> If Hanania thinks he's so smart, then he can get together with Bill Kristol and David French and figure out how to pull the rug out from under all those MAGA rubes.
Oh, you are getting rug pulled. You're just too distracted by the low culture war to notice the high culture war happening simultaneously. And it's not clear you're even winning the low culture war.
That you're putting Hanania in the same category as David French tells me you're not even close to seeing what's going on.
BTW, the high culture war is transhumanists vs. whoever shows up to oppose them. So far the opposition has been mostly MIA, and most of the opposition that has shown up is still at the "our magic war paint will stop the White man's bullets" level of understanding of what it's up against.
Well, modern AI is certainly no fable. Neither are the various reproductive technologies like IVF, embryo selection, and surrogacy that are already being used to produce new humans. Neither are things like cloning and genetic engineering that haven't (openly) been applied to humans yet, but are now regularly applied to other mammals.
Sort of - But of course the real message is Why TF is anyone talking about Kirk when a clear cut genocide is going on? Why isn't the genocide the topic of 2 out of every 3 of Sailer Posts?
Lets face it delusion in the face of extremely clear events IS the topic of this post and many other Sailer posts? You think the failure of the public to admit to a massive Black on Black murder industry is worth speaking about - how about the non-comment on the genocide?
The only thing interesting at all about Kirk to me is that here was a guy funded by pro-Israel money who turned away from Israel very very late on. Nothing else about Kirk is worth writing about.
(falling in love with a person not acceptable to scoiety is a pretty conventional way of gong crazy. It's an every day love stricken story not even a butter smeared trans story here.)
Twisting a non-story about Kirk into something about the real events of the last 2 years sounds perfectly normal to me.
Never mind Occam's knife, this is about the only story of the year - re-assessing Israel as the bad guys. Get on board Steve.
And so like most American jews and the overwhelming majority of younger jews I would expect him to feel obliged to call out a genocide when he sees one.
Keeperman too.
What is the point of getting a reputation for speaking plain truth if you don't speak the plainest truth of all?
A genocide? Lemme guess: Tutsis finally getting revenge on their Hutu enemies for the previous genocide which itself was payback for the more attractive, smarter Tutsis being chosen by the colonial powers to ride herd on the shorter, stockier, broad-nosed Hutus. I just hope it's over quickly. Like the Gaza War will be.
Sirhan Sirhan did not kill RFK. And the real question about JFK is who WASN’T involved. They all hated him for various reasons. Curtis LeMay, the Mafia, the CIA, the Zionists, LBJ, Bush Sr.
Semi related but I wonder why notorious horndogs like Wilt Chamberlain are never assassinated. If you sleep with hundreds of women then eventually you'll sleep with a crazy guy's wife. You see scenarios like this in movies a lot - the corrupt king sleeps with a musketeer's wife so the musketeer kills him etc. But rarely in real life.
I think it all started with the popularity of murder mysteries.
The vast majority of murders are very easy to explain. But the prevalence of murder mysteries-its the last person you'd expect (no it isn't) has caused this
The Simpsons had a good quote about that, as they do of a lot of things:
Kent: And with the prime suspect cleared and found completely innocent, we must now ask ourselves: who could possibly be as bloodthirsty as Waylon Smithers?
Marge: I guess it's never the most likely suspect.
Lisa: Actually, Mom, in 95% of cases, it is. The rest of the time, it's usually some deranged lunatic who did it for no reason.
Like this bizarre-sounding murder in the Bronx the other day. This couple was driving through a park when the husband pulled over so he could Drain the Weasel. As he was doing so, two men pulled up on a moped, stabbed the wife, and rode off. Rather than call 911 the husband drove his dying wife to a suburban hospital, bypassing other hospitals along the way, but she was dead by the time they arrived. It sounded like a Dominican version of Paulie Gatto’s rubout (“take the cannoli”).
Of course it didn’t happen that way. The obvious take was that the husband did it himself. And he did. There was no moped. And no cannoli.
Is Jeffrey Epstein's bizarre career and predictable death a suitable topic for the Occam's Butter Knife versus the Occam's Razor debate? Or maybe, like the assassination attempt of +John Paul II by some weird Turkish nobody, it's not.
Occam's Razor: nobody ever really heard of this striver-phony and he got lucky with a few wealthy clients and hooked up with F-list bon vivant Gizzy Maxwell, who managed to round up a few prole teenaged girls for him to hang around with and hoodwinked a few public figures to show up at parties before they started avoiding him like the plague. He asphyxiated himself on his jail bedsheet once it was clear his debauched, pointless life was over.
Occam's Butter Knife: He was running an elaborate honey trap to blackmail every NATO senior executive at the behest of wealthy Zionists, and got iced by them because he wanted to be a celebrity and got sloppy. So they arranged to get him jailed during the watch of Warden Sha'Quinta Johnson, and the two on-duty guards, DeeAnjello and Octavius, who dint see nuffin, and put in a cell with the brutal and completely psycho Nicholas Tartaglione, who asphyxiated him with the jail bedsheets.
The problem, of course, is that he really was put in a cell with a brutal psycho under the watch of three DIE hires, and was a devout Jew who went to the inexplicable trouble of building a synagogue on his private island, and had a way bigger footprint than his mediocre career in finance could support.
This is all way over my head, so I don't know and the people who really could know aren't saying much. Mike Tracey, who really does seem to be thorough and non-partisan, thinks it's the former scenario. So maybe, like the JFK assassination, this isn't the optimal Butter Knive vs. Razor debate.
The Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan assassination attempts are drearily straightforward, by contrast.
Sailer is a legend, but his boomer incredulity is showing again, and he acts as if Occam's Razor is the only possibility that reasonable people (like him) can countenance.
My "middle of the road" hypothesis, if it can be called such, is some very committed and wealthy Zionists had Epstein on the team, for whom he obligingly built a synagogue on his private island.
Then his bubble started collapsing and he got snuffed out as effortlessly as he went from high school math teacher to Series 7/CFP wealth manager.
Maybe Epstein was less James Bond than George Raft, a charismatic guy with mafia connections?
I've long wondered if Jeffrey Epstein's special service was mob-related. He often boasted that he was an expert at retrieving money for people. Perhaps he served as an expensive go-between for rich corporate types who'd gotten into embarrassing jams where their lawyers and accountants couldn't get their money back for them publicly, and Epstein radiated Outer Boroughs confidence that he was a guy who knew a guy who would break thumbs until Mr. Upper East Side got his money back.
A weird thing about Epstein is that criminals are almost never fans of scientists. But Epstein really liked having his picture taken with scientists. He spent a lot of money through the science book literary agent John Brockman to hang around with Brockman's clients. Maybe his mother wanted him to be a scientist or something?
Epstein liked to hang around with scientists and royalty. Both gave him credibility as they have the reputation of being above politics and incorruptable.
Re-reading his Wikipedia entry, Epstein was obviously quite smart and really, really good with money, a lot smarter and better with money than Bernie Madoff.
An important point is that when they met Maxwell had some social status but no money, due to her father’s bankruptcy, while Epstein had lots of money but little social grace. These weren’t two people on top of the world getting together. Another point against the blackmail theory is that a lot of his so-called friends seem to have dropped him after his first conviction, apart from ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson, who has a notorious weakness for any kind of rich man.
I wonder if social media exposes us to lots and lots of stupid people. There have always been lots of stupid people but they tended to talk amongst themselves. With social media they can share their opinions with everyone. Maybe the world has always been this stupid, and lately it's just more noticeable.
This is my experience. Forever imprinted on me is a conversation I had in 1996 on the Excite! board with a woman calling herself Goddess53. I think this was when Caro's first volume on LBJ came out, and her mission was to convince people that LBJ was a racist because he addressed his 17-year old driver as "boy." I asked how we shoukd weigh the fact that he was single-handedly responsible for not one but two Civil Rights Acts, but she was having none of it. Her issue wasn't even the War.
I think I missed your tone, Walter. Sorry for that. But I stand by my point that the Great Society programs crippled many generations of very competent black citizens and poisoned black-white relations, especially among the lower classes.
When you look at births in the very early Sixties, there was a higher percentage of children born to complete black households (mother and father) than the percentage of white births. LBJ, like Clinton and Gingrich after him, made laws and policies that seriously downplayed the importance of black fatherhood.
My particular Occam utensil is something like "Whichever group is hooting and hollering and cheering after the murder is by far the likeliest group the killer(s) came from." See: middle-eastern Muslims after 9/11, woke lefties after Charlie Kirk. The craziest thing is, they are always the same people who, in between orgasmic shouts of joy, will deny that anyone from their group would've done such a thing.
Tyler Robinson’s guilt seems clear cut to me. His own parents were involved in turning him in, after all.
As for the popularity of conspiracy theories, many people have realized they have been lied to by just about every imaginable source of authority. Bush and WMD in Iraq, bishops covering for pedophile priests in the Catholic Church, medical authorities touting the necessity of puberty blockers, hormones and surgery for confused kids, I’m sure you can supply your own examples. Is it really a surprise if they’re wondering just what else the great and good forgot to mention? Add in the utter senselessness of so many of the policies they see powerful men and women pursuing: “open borders,” “cashless bail,” free money for every non-contributing member of society . . . I’m hardly stupid and reasonably well informed, yet the sheer stupidity still baffles me.
At the moment, probably the most important thing is that TR has not been gunned down as happened with Oswald. If some self-described Christian conservative busts in on a court room and shoots TR dead, then the way will be cleared for a half-century of conspiracy theories. As long as he lives and is put through a normal trial, we have a good chance that the more dramatic stuff will slowly fade.
Some analogy exists in the way that we would have been better off if the Rosenbergs had been given prison sentences similar to Klaus Fuchs. Their speedy executions only obscured important facts of the case. If they had lived until Khrushchev's speech of 1956, they would probably have confessed a lot more in later life. Hopefully TR will have many years in prison for writing memoirs and such.
Margaret Roberts' Blowback, released this summer, is the best single book on the Oklahoma City bombing and demolishes any doubt that the government's lone wolf theory was true. She was a producer on America's Most Wanted and brings legitimate reporting cred to it. At this point it's not even a conspiracy theory: it's something that every fact out there points to, but the government simply refuses to acknowledge.
On the other hand, Paul Agostino's The Untold Truth of the Son of Sam, published last summer, is a different genre: the anti-conspiracy theory. A lifelong Yonkers native and champion, he did an incredible amount of legwork to take an axe to the current prevailing theory (started with Maury Terry's The Ultimate Evil) that there were other shooters involved. I went into it not knowing what to expect and damn if it didn't convince me by the end.
In short, it was a sting operation gone wrong. The gvt knew all the players and what they were doing, screwed up the day of the bombing, and did an extremely sloppy cleanup afterwards to hide their accountability.
Similarly, there is plenty of evidence that Teena Brandon (plus her roomates) and Matthew Shepard were killed because of drug deals gone bad, not "hate." Yet these myths persist. Likewise, some of Kitty Genovese's neighbors who woke up did call police, and the murder-rape, in that order, occurred in a hallway isolated from viewers who surely would have acted. Others who woke up saw nothing on the street minutes later because the killer had already stalked her to inside her apartment complex. Yet, to today, higher education clings to the "bystander effect" and teaches it to youth to deflect responsibility from her killer.
I have no use for "truthers" about 9/11. Matt Bai wrote a great book about being embedded in the Truther movement and found it encompassed both far-lefters and far-right libertarians who would make Ayn Rand ill. As I've said, political allegiance is a circle, not a line, and between 11:00p.m. and 1:00 a.m. is where all the kooks reside. And share their ideas. It's the leftitarian cusp.
Most of the older libertarians I know used to be professors in math and science, or airline pilots. They had a very hard time adjusting to the political cesspool of lobbying because they spent their life's work on financial, technical, and scientific truth. They were economists and scientists. I'm really sick of all of this preening about how the Tea Party (most supported both causes) is made up of dumb people. They're accomplished small business owners, accomplished builders, and other accomplished, academically credentially people. Enough. You don't know what you're talking about.
There has not been a good book written about Wayne Williams yet, and I know the task force leader and the SWAT team member who caught him dumping one body. Times were bad then: the police I know told me, uniformly, that some parents offed their own kids to share in the millions pouring in to support the victim families. More girls than boys were killed before, during, and after that time, but nobody set up a national task force for them. They were just dead prostitutes, many under age.
However, I highly recommend The Gravest Show on Earth, by Elinor Burkett, who lost jobs and friends to expose the extraordinary waste and growth of the AIDS industry.
I highly recommend The Antelope's Strategy, about the lie-coerced "reconciliation" between Hutus and Tutsi, orchestated by international aid groups and the UN. The author did a lot of interviews with victims and predators on the ground. A really stunning book, mostly for offering no solution.
Too true, Steve. Right now I am trying to see how much social media I can forgo and still be adequately informed.
All of it.
better to be uninformed than misinformed!
A fan of Samuel Clemons 🤎
Are these anti-Israel (and I would say anti-Semitic -- sometimes there's a difference, but perhaps not in this far-right case) conspiracy theories gaining traction? I even briefly saw Megyn Kelly (a hitherto respectable right-wing personality) devote an entire segment to discussing Candace Owens and some tie that she had drawn to Israel. I didn't watch, but that video garnered like 400K views in just a couple of hours, so anti-Semitism is extremely spicy and draws huge numbers of views. All these videos draw like 10x the number of views if not more compared to, say, any FOX News video. When there were JFK or Soviet Union conspiracies, that's one thing, but increasingly widespread anti-Semitic conspiracy theories unfortunately signal an eternal pattern, which remains ever-present.
There is a weird overlap bw conspiracy theorists and Jew haters—the world's most popular conspiracy theory is probably still "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"—probably because the Jews are both the despised Other yet also sprinkled liberally throughout the upper echelons of govt, finance, business, law, arts, academia etc.
Conspiracy theories are irresistible catnip to Jew haters because they provide a way for angry, miserable losers to offload their resentment onto an outgroup—thus not getting that job or into that school isn't because of your own failure, but because of powerful unseen nefarious forces that "control the world".
Conspiracy theories offer a simplistic and essentially gnostic worldview that replaces reason and empiricism with a fairy tale that magically transforms the conspiracist from creepy weirdo into someone blessed with higher knowledge, above and apart from the rest of us.
Apparently it is customary to believe that "conspiracy theories" are by definition false. However, conspiracies occur.
Consider the 2020 election.
On 4 February 2021, Time Magazine published confessions by participants, written by Molly Ball, entitled "The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election". https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/
Mollie Hemingway's book _Rigged_ documented more manipulations.
On 15 May 2025, Steve Sailer posted an editorial about the Pfizer company’s withholding vax-test information that would have helped the Trump campaign. https://www.stevesailer.net/p/a-smoking-gun
The manipulations are in addition to allegations of election fraud, although those are mentioned in Mollie Hemingway's book.
I'm not sure these rise to the level of conspiracy for me.
The Pfizer issue I would consider simple (if devious) corruption and the Ball piece shows a massive and massively funded campaign by our globalist ownership class to make sure they did all they could (legally and quasi) to make sure that the Orange Beast wasn't re-elected. Having various oligarchs like Zuckerberg fund and coordinate political activists is more hard ball, civil war-type politics than a secret cabal planning a conspiracy. Also, as much of it was public knowledge at the time, like the push for mail-in voting, this doesn't strike me as rising to the level of conspiratorial—though I admit on this issue, it's a fine line.
Here's the simple definition I just took from Wikipedia: "A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy (generally by powerful sinister groups, often political in motivation), when other explanations are more probable."
My idea of a prototypical conspiracy theory is something like the "9/11 was an inside job" idea, which relies on retroactive cherry-picking of facts combined with insane unproven (and unproveable) claims, like the buildings next to the WTC were wired for explosives, planted by some combo of CIA and Mossad. Then there's also all the conspiracy theories whenever a public figure meets an untimely end, like Princess Di or Tupac or that recent cluster of Germany AfD politics who all seemed to die in a bunch.
As you can tell, and I confess my bias, I am more of a partisan of Ockham's and Hanlon's Razors, and have never met a conspiracy theory that didn't seem a bit cracked to me.
You argue indirectly that since _some_ of the information in Molly Ball's article was public, the consipiracy she describes did not exist.
I previously read the Wikipedia article you cite and was not impressed with it.
Funny, I know lots of Jewish Tea Party members. In The Villages in Florida, they are quite prominent. I've spoken to nearly 100 of these groups. You're ignorant of what they are. And I had exactly one instance of anti-Catholicism when I spoke, and the group leader immediately apologized and told me the man was getting Alzheimers and was unpredictable. They didn't throw him out due to kindness, and then I always introduced myself as a Papist and took many questions about the Church's own rules regarding politics versus faith. I worked with successful blue-collar businessmen losing their careers to illegals, also film-makers, retired professors, and many other professionals. Pretty sleazy comment, Mister Clever.
Hello Tina,
Neither of my comments said anything about the Tea Party or about Catholicism. I really have no idea what you're referring to. Are you sure you replied to the right person?
Thanks
I read rhis thread from the bottom up, and perhaps other comments also influenced me, and I apologize.
No worries, these boxes can be very confusing. Thanks
I'm a technological dolt. I didn't even know I had email through my school until I had thousands and thousands of emails. My husband had to coax me to start blogging by designing a screen page that looked like a typewriter. Yet I come from an IBM family and even owned their first portable computer, which had three lines of text and weighed at least 50 pounds. They had a tough transition for several years back then.
Candace Owens has some very strange ideas. But she has a big audience.
I think not so much after FrontPageMag devastated her.
She still has millions of followers on X.
I don't use X much, just to follow Laurence Fox and Tommy Robinson. I'm dismayed by this. But it goes to show, when you legitimate and fund an unskilled attention-seeker such as Owens, you often get what you deserve.
Social media is a bugbear to me. Do you think she is still this popular after her meltdown, or that people just don't bother to remove her from their "following" list? Do you know if she still does tv and public speeches?
I don’t know. I’m glad to hear that Frontpage did an exposé.
Most of my followers and likes appear to be bots. Guess I'm electro-magnetically attractive.
lol 😺
No Jews, no news!
The take economy means people need to have instant reactions to things, and it’s better if those reactions upend the conventional wisdom. Ideally nothing should be what it seems.
For example, Matt Walsh seems to be a smart guy but even he is speculating that the shooter had some convoluted plot to exculpate his boyfriend by… texting him about the shooting, because Walsh had seen something similar on “Breaking Bad”.
Tucker Carlson thinks most major political figures are gay, apart from Pete Buttigieg, who’s just pretending.
Candace Owens thinks Brigitte Macron is a man, just for the hell of it I guess, or because the Michelle Obama theory was getting old.
She’s being sued by Madam Macron.
There's so much competition now for a fractured audience. Plus, there's no set time to watch them daily. In a media free for all, the strangest take takes the cake.
I think a common low-status or working-class reflex has always been “they’re all liars/crooks/pervs”, believed with more or less sincerity according to the situation. Now that everyone’s online and in control of their clicks that view gets catered to a lot more explicitly than it used to.
An idiot's $1 has the exact same value as a normal person's $1, and the idiot is more easily parted from his money. Catering to idiots seems like a no-brainer.
Steve: you actually believe that fabricated text chain between the "killer" and his "boyfriend?" Nobody is buying that ridiculous text chain that outlines everything in detail in an organized way.
I buy it.
I’m not sure I’ve heard about this text chain.
Weirdly, the furry bf seemed like the more level-headed one in the relationship, so I buy the shooter not wanting to tell him before the fact.
I buy it to the extent that it was produced by Robinson and his lover rather than by anybody else. I am less convinced that it was an entirely spontaneous exchange.
Right. I wouldn't be shocked by a two man conspiracy to exonerate the nonshooter.
The cops could test this with phone records. If they were sitting in the same room at the time they were texting, then it's a set-up. Did they talk on the phone before the text messages? Did they exchange emails before?
I thought they were hundreds of miles apart. How easy is it to change time stamps on texts? The NSA should be able to verify the signal traffic, right?
"Dad’s conclusion: Of course Sirhan did it. It was perhaps the clearest case he’d ever analyzed."
So then the final question remains: Sirhan was standing right in front of RFK when he fired the shots, and yet ballistics proved that RFK was killed by bullets fired from behind him. So that doesn't appear to be so open and shut.
Also, the newer released JFK files strongly suggest a CIA role in JFK's assassination, when for well over a half century, the public was officially told that the CIA played no direct or indirect role in JFK's death. Certain members of the Mafia have long intimated that they also had a hand in JFK's death as well. Perhaps one day, one day at least, uh, Oliver Stone will get an official apology from the established MSM, historians etc who insisted that he wasn't much more than a nutcase in asking sincere questions as in: Was JFK truly assassinated by a single person and there's no one else involved? If that was truly the case, then the Warren Commission files should've been released within the first decade on from '64, and the government should've been fully transparent about the case, as oppose to the "nothing to see here, folks! Keep it moving. And if anyone dares ask sincere questions and express skepticism about the official narrative, then you're the crackpot and conspiracy nut (the term conspiracy case was first coined by the CIA in the mid 60's to in part, silence opposition those from asking questions regarding the official narratives, such as about those concerning JFK)
Absolutley. That JFK was shot at from the back, and that 20 odd medical staff attested to that but weren't allowed to speak at the inquiry has been made crystal clear recently.
A CIA cover up is quite certain. Who they were covering up we have no advance on.
But in a free society, the public should've been permitted to expand the inquiry and discover the extent of the CIA's role, their motive, and, IF any foreign nation was also involved and if so, to what extent that they were?
It's getting more difficult to claim with a straight face in 2025 that Oswald acted alone on his own, that there wasn't any individual, group, etc behind him at all whatsoever.
It's not going to wash, and in the interests of transparency, the public should be permitted to examine these routes no matter where it may take them. After all, what does the Deep State have to hide that they don't want others to discover regarding JFK's death?
And all they had to do was originally release all the files back in the '60s and demonstrate transparency as well as that they are, at the end of the day, public servants (they work for the people, and not the other way around).
ergo it is not a free society - yes.
Not so much difficult to claim Oswald was alone - but outright dishonest.
No one makes the claim anymore, they just try to drop it.
They made this very claim for decades. In the mid 90's there was a propagandistic tome "Case Closed" by Richard Posner who claimed with a straight face that Oswald acted completely on his own with no help from anyone and no one backing him, period.
What Steve apparently seems to ignore, or prefers not to notice, is that sometimes, "conspiracy theories" are actually closer to finding the truth of established events than are the established narratives fed to the public by the powers that be (e.g. "the official version of how it all went down").
The emphasis here is on the word "sometimes", and not all the times. Sometimes the conspiracists get it right.
Sometimes they do, and when this happens, the trails should be followed until accuracy is found. One day, Oliver Stone is going to be received as sounding the warning light and in his own way, helped to urge the public to demand that the JFK files be released. While obviously there are still more files to release (as well as files that may likely have been destroyed), at the end of the day, Mr Stone helped contribute to getting to the bottom of one of the more horrific assassinations of the 20th Century.
Because the longer the powers that be continue to stonewall and stall and demonstrate a total lack of transparency, then the question becomes louder and louder with each passing decade: what exactly are they trying to hide and cover up? And of course, who benefits by continuing the deception on the public?
Wrong Posner. Uh oh.
Gerald Posner. Thanks for catching it.
Point remains, it's a good little tome that echoes standard talking points, courtesy of the Deep State.
The difference is the recent release of materials that found a large number of medical staff (17?) had been interviewed and said the wounds were consistent with a bullet from the back. Yet not a single one of them were presented to the inquiry which claimed only the shooter from the front.
Ergo CIA covered up the conspiracy of other shooters is now FACT not reasonably suspiscion.
But there were things that the Warren Commission were presented with at the time and they chose to ignore, minimize or simply not include in the final report. Certain things even in the 60's were well known and they chose to ignore it.
Don't know if you should tell Steve about this point, as it does appear that he sincerely believes that RFK was assassinated without any doubt whatsoever by Sirhan Sirhan.
Oliver Stone - the Untold History of the United States is a heroic work explaining the difference between the real truth about Star Wars, the Death star and the Galactic Empire as opposed to the frequently told story of Star Trek, and the USS Enterprise boldly seeking for good deeds to do.
Only when one has seen the Untold version can one sensible understand how US has acted in say Syria, or how Russia and China can be seen by most countries as the good guys.
Not entirely sure if this is sarcasm or sincere seriousness. Is this "No Doy" as we used to say?
But on JFK at least, Mr Stone was accurately correct.
What remains fascinating though is that for most of the entire Cold War, the liberal Left consistently downplayed the atrocities of the USSR; in some instances, they actively supported the USSR's leaders. However, once the Soviet Union fell and Putin (specifically) came to power, then it was Katie Bar the Door and Russia has been the Devil Incarnate.
for the Left, socialism from a globalist perspective was just fine; but nationalism remains the true evil.
After all, there aren't many US Leftists that actively support China nor it's policies, or at least they haven't been vocal about supporting China in decades. Wonder why not? China isn't capitalist, it certainly isn't a white nation--in that sense it checks off the cool Politically Correct boxes. If one wants to make a case that China doesn't have a pure record on human rights, that never prevented the Left from supporting the USSR, Cuba, and other nations that had just as horrific record, (if not worse) on human rights.
So why doesn't the Left actively and publicly support China? Non-white, and not capitalist system of government. What's not to support, especially as the Left routinely supported such nations in their past. Could it be...that the Left is mostly racist in whom they choose to support, and hence they can 't support a non-white nation such as China?
That's a sincere question.
Our domestic intelligence agencies were pretty much destroyed by Eric Holder, and I put nothing past him, nor Elena Kagan. Clinton, Holder, and Kagan were quite a team, and none of them stupid. Obama bringing them back in from the cold was one of the worst acts of his presidency.
Great, so now we need to find out who Steve's friend's father is and how he was compromised.
Just ask him.
No - we have to ask him why he told his son it was a clear open and shut case.
Unfortuneately that doesn't advance us very much.
RFK might have turned away.
Believe that and the Deep State will tell ya another one.
Occam's Razor = there was another shooter, standing right behind RFK.
But once again, this demonstates that the Deep State has no interest in being transparent with the citizenry regarding the horrendous deaths of public officials.
ol' tucknuts. low iq candass. I like naming names. there are others but not worth the energy at this point.
Richard Hanania is right. The Republican Party is, sadly, moving downstream and starting to attract fewer white collar professionals from elite universities and more…people who are intrigued by the scintillating theories of Joe Rogan, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes regarding vaccines, dragons, the Rothschilds, secret transgenders, 2020 election fraud, etc.
Trump contributed to this, but I think the upcoming Marjorie Taylor Greene era will be far worse than the Trump era.
The future modal Republican voter isn’t a white guy who reads the WSJ, it’s a mixed-race/nonwhite guy who gets his info from Nick Fuentes podcast clips. (Not even the full podcast, just Twitter and TikTok clips.)
17 years ago, Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam wrote “Grand New Party” without seeming to realize that making the GOP more working class would also make it dumber. They spoke about it last year in a pretty humorously oblivious conversation.
Similarly, smart Jewish Dems seem increasingly to be held captive by the racial special interests they’ve encouraged. (In England the Labour Party is planning to recognize Palestinian statehood as a sop to Muslim voters.)
Ignorance of IQ bell curves has a lot to answer for.
The votes of the working class count just as much as anyone else's. The issue is that once you get a reputation for being the Stupid Party, smart people such as myself won't want to officially join even if they are sympathetic to your cause. I have now voted for Trump multiple times but I'm still a Democrat because I would be embarrassed to publicly identify myself as a Republican
"because I would be embarrassed to publicly identify myself as a Republican"
That says more about your social cohort than it does about the Republican party.
If by "social cohort" you mean "society writ large", I agree. Whenever I see I dumb white person they invariably vote Republican. Lion of the Blogosphere*, who is an anti-Trump rightist, just explicitly made the point that the left is higher-IQ than the right, although he left out of the racial qualifier which would have made his pointer stronger, if more contentious...
* https://x.com/LionBlogosphere/status/1969434744333934734
You do need higher IQ to convince yourself of "6 impossible things before breakfast".
What do you think when you see a dumb negro?
Yeah, intellects like sodden William Buckley, who wanted his own little serial killer after Norman Mailer had one. I don't have much positive to say about Mailer, but at least he apologized to the victim's family the next time the guy he got released. Buckley, meanwhile, fell so hard for his own little pet who bashed women and girls' skulls in that he refused to respond when police requested the record of their correspondence after Buckley got sprung the very bloody sicko, including details about other crimes against females.
I'd beat him with a sack of oranges if he was alive today. Imagine Norman Mailer being higher on the low end of the ethical chart than Buckley.
"Society writ large" has a mean IQ of 97. The perception of Republicans as "stupid" is a bias of people from the chattering and FIRE classes, like underemployed Jewish lawyers living in New York City. Again, with the Democratic parties' most loyal constituencies being sub-90 IQ ethnic minorities, members of public employee unions, and women with purple hair, it's hilarious to read urbanites declaring the Republican party beneath them.
I hold advanced degrees, and the laborers I worked with for years could run intellectual, acquisition of new skills, and intellectual circles around them.
Academia and its products have been degraded for a long time. What did you do to stop it?
And then you won't be able to vote in Republican primaries in most of the states...
Yes, in New Jersey I cannot vote in the Republican primary, but this does not bother me
You'd have to stand in line with the 85 IQ negros in the Democratic primary.
In New Jersey we all stand in the same line
Not if they vote by mail :D
This goes WAY back. Once upon a time Americans were offered the choice of either a bloated welfare state or ever more concentration of wealth in the hands of the super rich. Back in the 70s the only people broaching the idea that we could have something approximating Thomas Jefferson's yeoman dominated small government society were the conspiracy theorists, especially the John Birch Society. "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" sold five million copies.
Donald Trump is trying to make the Republican Party more working class friendly. So of course he panders to the conspiracy theorists. Millions of votes of people who agree with his agenda more or less -- vs. the Lavender RINOs who just want their special tax breaks.
Part of my current project is trying to make a populist agenda more NPR friendly. The termite charts and blaming the Rockefellers and Rothchilds for everything detracts for the real story. Deficit spending is a direct subsidy for the already rich. Borrowing from the capital pool is no different from buying up cheese to support farmers. Tax free foundations inevitably end up in the hands of leftists. Who wants to take up a career of giving away a rich person's money? Leftists! As for the idea that billionaires could be cool with socialism, just look around! It's a different set of billionaires, but they same dynamic.
Which is why I have gone from Libertarian to wanting to raise taxes on the ultra rich. The latter is the only way to cut government. https://rulesforreactionaries.substack.com/p/rule-10-tax-thine-enemies
"Trying to make a populist agenda more NPR friendly"
Your task is Sisyphean. Godspeed.
Trump V2 is succeeding this time around because he has thinktank support. If you look through my posts on Substack you will find that the Trump administration is "stealing" my ideas left and right.
I am not taking credit. Heritage has a bunch of smart people coming to similar conclusions, and RFK Jr. is filling in much of the rest.
Check marks all around.
But NPR types still despise it.
Think NPR and PBS from 40+ years ago. Still, an overall left bias (especially NPR) but nowhere near as strident and dishonest as today.
PBS had Wall St. Week, Firing Line and The McLaughlin Group. Milton Friedman did the documentary series Free To Choose on PBS.
What never happened was the equivalent of Free to Choose from the populist viewpoint. There were no populists capable of making their cases without sinking into conspiracy theories unworthy of PBS.
Let's try a concrete example. Trump has been framing the tariff argument in terms of winners and losers. He talks about other countries taking advantage of us, etc. Very much schoolyard dynamics rhetoric. Works for some. Does not work for those who think they understand economics. The textbooks teach Comparative Advantage, etc. therefore Trump is a moron.
Well, the old textbooks don't take into account the modern welfare state and income taxes. They are truly obsolete. Need to directly attack the obsolete textbooks. I did so a few years back here: https://rulesforreactionaries.substack.com/p/free-trade-isnt
"Lavender RINOs"...2012 trying to find a reason to vote for Romney and whatshisname. Just coudn't.
Power is just as important as wealth. Probably more so. Fauci is not THAT rich, and he never had electoral mandate, but boy did he have power! Whatever you can tell about wealth, there is always a huge power inequality, particularly in the "socialist" countries.
Yes, but not infinitely more important than wealth, since great wealth automatically becomes a form of power.
Some power as long as you keep your nose clean. As one has seen during Russian revolution, or the 3rd Reich, even great wealth doesn't protect you that much.
GOP turned downward out of necessity, because the cleverer guys are now all indoctrinated by leftist universities. Until GOP founds new fully conservative universities with conservative faculty, this isn't going to change.
Lots of people went through leftist universities and came out voting straight ticket republican for decades until in their 40s they decided the gop was too stupid for their votes and money.
So they suddenly started voting for Ilhan Omar and Zohran Mamdani? Give me a break!
Most of the people I have met in the working class are far more intelligent than academicians. Also more necessary.
A lot of academics live in their ivory towers and are cuddled because they can do symbolic operations well. At the same time they frequently lack in street smarts. Essentially, there are two different "intelligences" that don't correlate well.
Pardon my Anglo-Saxon but, fuck the professional class (of which I am a member).
They are effete, rent-seeking, striver snobs and deracinated, soulless zombies.
They lap up all the crackpot, unscientific droppings from their elite betters--transgenderism, global warming, blank slate egalitarianism--like kittens and cream behind walls of high property values.
They despise their countrymen, the ones who are first responders and utility and construction tradesmen and have the highest occupational fatalities, and want them replaced.
Adrian Vermeule, Christopher Caldwell, Victor Davis Hanson, James Howard Kunstler, JD Vance, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie: none of these people are intellectual slouches and they are on Team Trump. Maybe you should be?
Adrian V wants to establish a Catholic theocracy in the United States. Aside from the tolerance of priestly pedophilia, you also have the down side of reducing us to Latin American economic and scientific primitivism. No thanks!
Adrian V was also advocating for snatching Jewish babies, baptizing them and raising them as Catholics... There was a major clash on First Things about that, IIRC
I think we should snatch Jewish babies and raise them as Objectivists.
You mean as disciples of Ayn Rand? Lol, not going to work, even though the lady was Jewish by birth.
If it wasn’t obvious, I was joking. My wife and I have two kittens named Dagny and Dominique. I think they are Objectivists, for sure.
Her literary criticism is excellent. Her own novels are beach reading. Not a stupid woman, but she gave us leftitarianism, a toxic brew.
The Republican went from being the party of "eat your vegetables" to the part of "I'm not going to eat my vegetables and you can't make me."
White guys reading the WSJ gave us open borders.
Also the Kochs. Remember David Koch ran for Vice President in 1980 with an open-borders policy so extreme that the NYTimes criticized it.
Later, while they were astroturfing the the Tea Party to deligitimize it, they made their group leaders sign non-disclosers that were iron-tight. They forgot to give me one, so I pretty singularly can tell the truth about them. So I stayed with them throughout 2012 in Florida, watched them, and then did podcasts about them with Cliff Kincaid that were removed from the web. I have some pretty sick stories about how they shut up any discussion of immigration by Tea Partiers at risk of firing and lawsuits. Rubio is their bag boy. I hate to see him with Trump. They also support no prisons and legalization of all drugs and have more recently partnered with Soros' Open Society network and declared they would be voting Democrat. I've listened to Slade O'Brian, now their national head of "grassroots organizing," blind drunk at ten a.m. talking about how dumb Tea Partiers are and how easy it is to make them submissive and obedient. Do not let AFP or their other fake organizations anywhere near you. Above all, avoid their "Five for Five" paperwork. It silences you while claiming credit for your group's work.
Most of their internal staff comes from the Bush family borg.
What's AFP and why should anyone avoid it?
Koch astroturf open borders orga ization focused on discrediting a d controlling the TEA Party. Real cotton button-down thugs.
What does "AFP" stand for?
> Richard Hanania is right. <
LOL.
> The Republican Party is, sadly, moving downstream and starting to attract fewer white collar professionals from elite universities and more…people who are intrigued by the scintillating theories of Joe Rogan, Candace Owens, and Nick Fuentes regarding vaccines, dragons, the Rothschilds, secret transgenders, 2020 election fraud, etc.<
Compared to ...
-- "diversity is our greatest strength"
-- "nation of immigrants"
-- grrrl power!
-- structural racism
-- gay "marriage"
-- China can make everything and we'll be fine with "services"--i.e. selling our assets and government debt
-- "must have immigration!" (an obvious stupidity Hanania is huge proponent of)
-- gay "marriage"
-- "people who menstruate"
-- "gender assigned at birth"
-- "George Floyd was murdered"
-- "open borders"
and of course
-- "race is a social construct" and "race does not exist"
There is stupid--agreed--and there's *stupid*--as in real nation and civilization ending stupid.
Smart people would rather work in finance than on an assembly line like some Fujanese peasant.
Speak for youself. I have advanced degrees and prefer manual labor, which is intellectual in its own way. And you have no idea how much more the average mechanic makes compared with the average adjunct, who make up about 90% of all higher education instructors.
The left (and especially women) is a big believer in social proof as a sign of correctness, i.e. they take the word "proof" in "social proof" literally. This doesn't make them low-IQ per se, though
Go pound sand. Better yet, hire an illegal to do it for you.
I disagree. I've spent plenty of time in academia and the Tea Party. The latter, I toured on my own dime mostly, trying to teach these normal and perfectly intelligent people how difficult it is to discern bullshitters in politics. If they were naive, it was a function of being civil and having spent their lives raising kids, volunteering, going to church, holding non-political jobs being stolen by illegals, and being called assholes by the likes of you. And academia, which is a literal cesspool.
You know what the newer, "dumber" GOP did? Win.
It's pretty incredible. Trump 1.0 explicitly pursued the Sailer strategy, appealing to the country's still-white majority but I don't think Steve has ever acknowledged this.
Trump 2.0 pursued what could be called the Sailer strategy (rev. 2024), recognizing that black and latino men don't like getting lectured by liberal white women about gender fluidity either. Gets more of the black and latino vote than ever. Flips back every State that turned in the flawed, opaque, and statistically non-credible 2020 election.
I'm told Sailer is no intellectual slouch, and Team Trump has actually been following his advice, and still get no credit for it.
If Hanania thinks he's so smart, then he can get together with Bill Kristol and David French and figure out how to pull the rug out from under all those MAGA rubes.
Hanania is the embodiment of the "Delayed Informatization Intellectual", a ridiculous priest of the liberal cargo cult 2cb described back in the 2019 https://theamericansun.wordpress.com/2019/08/27/ideologies-of-delayed-informatization/
That Johnson gave him space back in the days should be enough to classified CC as the dreg of the alt-right.
> If Hanania thinks he's so smart, then he can get together with Bill Kristol and David French and figure out how to pull the rug out from under all those MAGA rubes.
Oh, you are getting rug pulled. You're just too distracted by the low culture war to notice the high culture war happening simultaneously. And it's not clear you're even winning the low culture war.
That you're putting Hanania in the same category as David French tells me you're not even close to seeing what's going on.
BTW, the high culture war is transhumanists vs. whoever shows up to oppose them. So far the opposition has been mostly MIA, and most of the opposition that has shown up is still at the "our magic war paint will stop the White man's bullets" level of understanding of what it's up against.
Transhumanism is as fabulist as transgenderism.
Well, modern AI is certainly no fable. Neither are the various reproductive technologies like IVF, embryo selection, and surrogacy that are already being used to produce new humans. Neither are things like cloning and genetic engineering that haven't (openly) been applied to humans yet, but are now regularly applied to other mammals.
Sort of - But of course the real message is Why TF is anyone talking about Kirk when a clear cut genocide is going on? Why isn't the genocide the topic of 2 out of every 3 of Sailer Posts?
Lets face it delusion in the face of extremely clear events IS the topic of this post and many other Sailer posts? You think the failure of the public to admit to a massive Black on Black murder industry is worth speaking about - how about the non-comment on the genocide?
The only thing interesting at all about Kirk to me is that here was a guy funded by pro-Israel money who turned away from Israel very very late on. Nothing else about Kirk is worth writing about.
(falling in love with a person not acceptable to scoiety is a pretty conventional way of gong crazy. It's an every day love stricken story not even a butter smeared trans story here.)
Twisting a non-story about Kirk into something about the real events of the last 2 years sounds perfectly normal to me.
Never mind Occam's knife, this is about the only story of the year - re-assessing Israel as the bad guys. Get on board Steve.
Steve Sailer Is Jewish. He Works For Fellow Jew, Jonathan Keeperan aka Lomez who runs Passage Press.
And so like most American jews and the overwhelming majority of younger jews I would expect him to feel obliged to call out a genocide when he sees one.
Keeperman too.
What is the point of getting a reputation for speaking plain truth if you don't speak the plainest truth of all?
Amusing, from someone who cares that he Jewish.
What does that mean?
A genocide? Lemme guess: Tutsis finally getting revenge on their Hutu enemies for the previous genocide which itself was payback for the more attractive, smarter Tutsis being chosen by the colonial powers to ride herd on the shorter, stockier, broad-nosed Hutus. I just hope it's over quickly. Like the Gaza War will be.
Don't advertise the fact you are a dickhead.
Sure you want them all dead quick - we know that. Then you can pretend nothing happened..
You must be a real hit with the chicks...
Thankyou. Do you sleep at night?
The tide is turning, slowly. Israel is becoming a pariah in much of the civilized world.
The tide turned long ago - it is just reporting of it that is taking so long.
Most of the world - everyone except the west had Israel as a Pariah from October 24th.
Indeed most had US as a pariah then.
The change is that now people are willing to stand up to US.
In particular India.
We don't need this stuff.
Sirhan Sirhan did not kill RFK. And the real question about JFK is who WASN’T involved. They all hated him for various reasons. Curtis LeMay, the Mafia, the CIA, the Zionists, LBJ, Bush Sr.
Semi related but I wonder why notorious horndogs like Wilt Chamberlain are never assassinated. If you sleep with hundreds of women then eventually you'll sleep with a crazy guy's wife. You see scenarios like this in movies a lot - the corrupt king sleeps with a musketeer's wife so the musketeer kills him etc. But rarely in real life.
(For Wilt it helps to be seven feet tall.)
You know, some scientists these days are saying movies and reality are different.
The Gordian Knot was in present day Turkey. Coincidence?
I think it all started with the popularity of murder mysteries.
The vast majority of murders are very easy to explain. But the prevalence of murder mysteries-its the last person you'd expect (no it isn't) has caused this
Good point!
The Simpsons had a good quote about that, as they do of a lot of things:
Kent: And with the prime suspect cleared and found completely innocent, we must now ask ourselves: who could possibly be as bloodthirsty as Waylon Smithers?
Marge: I guess it's never the most likely suspect.
Lisa: Actually, Mom, in 95% of cases, it is. The rest of the time, it's usually some deranged lunatic who did it for no reason.
Like this bizarre-sounding murder in the Bronx the other day. This couple was driving through a park when the husband pulled over so he could Drain the Weasel. As he was doing so, two men pulled up on a moped, stabbed the wife, and rode off. Rather than call 911 the husband drove his dying wife to a suburban hospital, bypassing other hospitals along the way, but she was dead by the time they arrived. It sounded like a Dominican version of Paulie Gatto’s rubout (“take the cannoli”).
Of course it didn’t happen that way. The obvious take was that the husband did it himself. And he did. There was no moped. And no cannoli.
Is Jeffrey Epstein's bizarre career and predictable death a suitable topic for the Occam's Butter Knife versus the Occam's Razor debate? Or maybe, like the assassination attempt of +John Paul II by some weird Turkish nobody, it's not.
Occam's Razor: nobody ever really heard of this striver-phony and he got lucky with a few wealthy clients and hooked up with F-list bon vivant Gizzy Maxwell, who managed to round up a few prole teenaged girls for him to hang around with and hoodwinked a few public figures to show up at parties before they started avoiding him like the plague. He asphyxiated himself on his jail bedsheet once it was clear his debauched, pointless life was over.
Occam's Butter Knife: He was running an elaborate honey trap to blackmail every NATO senior executive at the behest of wealthy Zionists, and got iced by them because he wanted to be a celebrity and got sloppy. So they arranged to get him jailed during the watch of Warden Sha'Quinta Johnson, and the two on-duty guards, DeeAnjello and Octavius, who dint see nuffin, and put in a cell with the brutal and completely psycho Nicholas Tartaglione, who asphyxiated him with the jail bedsheets.
The problem, of course, is that he really was put in a cell with a brutal psycho under the watch of three DIE hires, and was a devout Jew who went to the inexplicable trouble of building a synagogue on his private island, and had a way bigger footprint than his mediocre career in finance could support.
This is all way over my head, so I don't know and the people who really could know aren't saying much. Mike Tracey, who really does seem to be thorough and non-partisan, thinks it's the former scenario. So maybe, like the JFK assassination, this isn't the optimal Butter Knive vs. Razor debate.
The Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan assassination attempts are drearily straightforward, by contrast.
Sailer is a legend, but his boomer incredulity is showing again, and he acts as if Occam's Razor is the only possibility that reasonable people (like him) can countenance.
And never bet against Mossad when something nasty has happened.
Mossad is incredibly good at what they do.
My "middle of the road" hypothesis, if it can be called such, is some very committed and wealthy Zionists had Epstein on the team, for whom he obligingly built a synagogue on his private island.
Then his bubble started collapsing and he got snuffed out as effortlessly as he went from high school math teacher to Series 7/CFP wealth manager.
Maybe Epstein was less James Bond than George Raft, a charismatic guy with mafia connections?
I've long wondered if Jeffrey Epstein's special service was mob-related. He often boasted that he was an expert at retrieving money for people. Perhaps he served as an expensive go-between for rich corporate types who'd gotten into embarrassing jams where their lawyers and accountants couldn't get their money back for them publicly, and Epstein radiated Outer Boroughs confidence that he was a guy who knew a guy who would break thumbs until Mr. Upper East Side got his money back.
A weird thing about Epstein is that criminals are almost never fans of scientists. But Epstein really liked having his picture taken with scientists. He spent a lot of money through the science book literary agent John Brockman to hang around with Brockman's clients. Maybe his mother wanted him to be a scientist or something?
"A weird thing about Epstein is that criminals are almost never fans of scientists."
Non-sequitur of the day?
Epstein liked to hang around with scientists and royalty. Both gave him credibility as they have the reputation of being above politics and incorruptable.
Re-reading his Wikipedia entry, Epstein was obviously quite smart and really, really good with money, a lot smarter and better with money than Bernie Madoff.
An important point is that when they met Maxwell had some social status but no money, due to her father’s bankruptcy, while Epstein had lots of money but little social grace. These weren’t two people on top of the world getting together. Another point against the blackmail theory is that a lot of his so-called friends seem to have dropped him after his first conviction, apart from ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson, who has a notorious weakness for any kind of rich man.
Wonder why there seems to be no media curiosity as to why Gizzy was in Chelsea's wedding party.
I wonder if social media exposes us to lots and lots of stupid people. There have always been lots of stupid people but they tended to talk amongst themselves. With social media they can share their opinions with everyone. Maybe the world has always been this stupid, and lately it's just more noticeable.
What's shocking is the number of well-educated and/or highly-placed stupid people. They all want to do their own PR.
This is my experience. Forever imprinted on me is a conversation I had in 1996 on the Excite! board with a woman calling herself Goddess53. I think this was when Caro's first volume on LBJ came out, and her mission was to convince people that LBJ was a racist because he addressed his 17-year old driver as "boy." I asked how we shoukd weigh the fact that he was single-handedly responsible for not one but two Civil Rights Acts, but she was having none of it. Her issue wasn't even the War.
LBJ doesn't merit any admiration. Andif you read those civil rights bills, they did more damage to decent black families than the Klan.
I really didn't expect you to miss the point, Tina.
I think I missed your tone, Walter. Sorry for that. But I stand by my point that the Great Society programs crippled many generations of very competent black citizens and poisoned black-white relations, especially among the lower classes.
When you look at births in the very early Sixties, there was a higher percentage of children born to complete black households (mother and father) than the percentage of white births. LBJ, like Clinton and Gingrich after him, made laws and policies that seriously downplayed the importance of black fatherhood.
Maybe we're just talking past each other.
My particular Occam utensil is something like "Whichever group is hooting and hollering and cheering after the murder is by far the likeliest group the killer(s) came from." See: middle-eastern Muslims after 9/11, woke lefties after Charlie Kirk. The craziest thing is, they are always the same people who, in between orgasmic shouts of joy, will deny that anyone from their group would've done such a thing.
Tyler Robinson’s guilt seems clear cut to me. His own parents were involved in turning him in, after all.
As for the popularity of conspiracy theories, many people have realized they have been lied to by just about every imaginable source of authority. Bush and WMD in Iraq, bishops covering for pedophile priests in the Catholic Church, medical authorities touting the necessity of puberty blockers, hormones and surgery for confused kids, I’m sure you can supply your own examples. Is it really a surprise if they’re wondering just what else the great and good forgot to mention? Add in the utter senselessness of so many of the policies they see powerful men and women pursuing: “open borders,” “cashless bail,” free money for every non-contributing member of society . . . I’m hardly stupid and reasonably well informed, yet the sheer stupidity still baffles me.
At the moment, probably the most important thing is that TR has not been gunned down as happened with Oswald. If some self-described Christian conservative busts in on a court room and shoots TR dead, then the way will be cleared for a half-century of conspiracy theories. As long as he lives and is put through a normal trial, we have a good chance that the more dramatic stuff will slowly fade.
Some analogy exists in the way that we would have been better off if the Rosenbergs had been given prison sentences similar to Klaus Fuchs. Their speedy executions only obscured important facts of the case. If they had lived until Khrushchev's speech of 1956, they would probably have confessed a lot more in later life. Hopefully TR will have many years in prison for writing memoirs and such.
Margaret Roberts' Blowback, released this summer, is the best single book on the Oklahoma City bombing and demolishes any doubt that the government's lone wolf theory was true. She was a producer on America's Most Wanted and brings legitimate reporting cred to it. At this point it's not even a conspiracy theory: it's something that every fact out there points to, but the government simply refuses to acknowledge.
On the other hand, Paul Agostino's The Untold Truth of the Son of Sam, published last summer, is a different genre: the anti-conspiracy theory. A lifelong Yonkers native and champion, he did an incredible amount of legwork to take an axe to the current prevailing theory (started with Maury Terry's The Ultimate Evil) that there were other shooters involved. I went into it not knowing what to expect and damn if it didn't convince me by the end.
Thanks, I’ll have a look at Blowback.
what were the conclusions of her book?
In short, it was a sting operation gone wrong. The gvt knew all the players and what they were doing, screwed up the day of the bombing, and did an extremely sloppy cleanup afterwards to hide their accountability.
Similarly, there is plenty of evidence that Teena Brandon (plus her roomates) and Matthew Shepard were killed because of drug deals gone bad, not "hate." Yet these myths persist. Likewise, some of Kitty Genovese's neighbors who woke up did call police, and the murder-rape, in that order, occurred in a hallway isolated from viewers who surely would have acted. Others who woke up saw nothing on the street minutes later because the killer had already stalked her to inside her apartment complex. Yet, to today, higher education clings to the "bystander effect" and teaches it to youth to deflect responsibility from her killer.
I have no use for "truthers" about 9/11. Matt Bai wrote a great book about being embedded in the Truther movement and found it encompassed both far-lefters and far-right libertarians who would make Ayn Rand ill. As I've said, political allegiance is a circle, not a line, and between 11:00p.m. and 1:00 a.m. is where all the kooks reside. And share their ideas. It's the leftitarian cusp.
Most of the older libertarians I know used to be professors in math and science, or airline pilots. They had a very hard time adjusting to the political cesspool of lobbying because they spent their life's work on financial, technical, and scientific truth. They were economists and scientists. I'm really sick of all of this preening about how the Tea Party (most supported both causes) is made up of dumb people. They're accomplished small business owners, accomplished builders, and other accomplished, academically credentially people. Enough. You don't know what you're talking about.
There has not been a good book written about Wayne Williams yet, and I know the task force leader and the SWAT team member who caught him dumping one body. Times were bad then: the police I know told me, uniformly, that some parents offed their own kids to share in the millions pouring in to support the victim families. More girls than boys were killed before, during, and after that time, but nobody set up a national task force for them. They were just dead prostitutes, many under age.
However, I highly recommend The Gravest Show on Earth, by Elinor Burkett, who lost jobs and friends to expose the extraordinary waste and growth of the AIDS industry.
I highly recommend The Antelope's Strategy, about the lie-coerced "reconciliation" between Hutus and Tutsi, orchestated by international aid groups and the UN. The author did a lot of interviews with victims and predators on the ground. A really stunning book, mostly for offering no solution.