Higher intelligence is associated with liberal political ideology, atheism, and men’s (but not women’s) preference for sexual exclusivity
More intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.
The study, published in the March 2010 issue of the peer-reviewed scientific journal Social Psychology Quarterly, advances a new theory to explain why people form particular preferences and values. The theory suggests that more intelligent people are more likely than less intelligent people to adopt evolutionarily novel preferences and values, but intelligence does not correlate with preferences and values that are old enough to have been shaped by evolution over millions of years.
“Evolutionarily novel” preferences and values are those that humans are not biologically designed to have and our ancestors probably did not possess. In contrast, those that our ancestors had for millions of years are “evolutionarily familiar.”
“General intelligence, the ability to think and reason, endowed our ancestors with advantages in solving evolutionarily novel problems for which they did not have innate solutions,” says Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science. “As a result, more intelligent people are more likely to recognize and understand such novel entities and situations than less intelligent people, and some of these entities and situations are preferences, values, and lifestyles.”
An earlier study by Kanazawa found that more intelligent individuals were more nocturnal, waking up and staying up later than less intelligent individuals. Because our ancestors lacked artificial light, they tended to wake up shortly before dawn and go to sleep shortly after dusk. Being nocturnal is evolutionarily novel.
In the current study, Kanazawa argues that humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends, and being liberal, caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers they never meet or interact with, is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals.
Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) support Kanazawa’s hypothesis. Young adults who subjectively identify themselves as “very liberal” have an average IQ of 106 during adolescence while those who identify themselves as “very conservative” have an average IQ of 95 during adolescence.
Similarly, religion is a byproduct of humans’ tendency to perceive agency and intention as causes of events, to see “the hands of God” at work behind otherwise natural phenomena. “Humans are evolutionarily designed to be paranoid, and they believe in God because they are paranoid,” says Kanazawa. This innate bias toward paranoia served humans well when self-preservation and protection of their families and clans depended on extreme vigilance to all potential dangers. “So, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become atheists.”
Young adults who identify themselves as “not at all religious” have an average IQ of 103 during adolescence, while those who identify themselves as “very religious” have an average IQ of 97 during adolescence.
In addition, humans have always been mildly polygynous in evolutionary history. Men in polygynous marriages were not expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate, whereas men in monogamous marriages were. In sharp contrast, whether they are in a monogamous or polygynous marriage, women were always expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate. So being sexually exclusive is evolutionarily novel for men, but not for women. And the theory predicts that more intelligent men are more likely to value sexual exclusivity than less intelligent men, but general intelligence makes no difference for women’s value on sexual exclusivity. Kanazawa’s analysis of Add Health data supports these sex-specific predictions as well.
One intriguing but theoretically predicted finding of the study is that more intelligent people are no more or no less likely to value such evolutionarily familiar entities as marriage, family, children, and friends.
The article “Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent” will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly, a publication of the American Sociological Association. A copy can be obtained by bona fide journalists by emailing a request to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Voice of Reason Broadcast Network is pleased to announce a new program, The Heretics’ Hour, hosted by Carolyn Yeager. The show starts Monday, March 1, 2009 and will run weekly Monday 9 to 10 PM, Eastern U.S. time.
Carolyn Yeager will bring you news, commentary and guest interviews dealing with Holocaust revisionism, World War Two history, free speech issues, and more.
About Carolyn Yeager
Carolyn Yeager has become known for her revisionist writings. She has been working with a partner to translate and write commentary for Ein Anderer Hitler, the memoir of Hermann Giesler. This work has been published in continuing installments in The Barnes Review (TBR) since November 2008. She has also written a booklet titled “Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour,” to be published by TBR in March 2010.
Carolyn has done an in-depth study of the testimony and writings of holocaust survivor Irene Zisblatt, inspired by the original exposé of Zisblatt by Eric Hunt; it appeared on the revisionist blog Inconvenient History during January 2010, along with two follow-up articles.
She is a fan of Internet radio and has appeared as a guest several times on the Mike Piper Report, on the Republic Broadcasting Network, and also on The Sunic Journal here on VoR.
Two weeks ago, European leaders tapped Germany to lead a bailout of Greece. Since then — sturm und drang and chaos. Germans are infuriated over everything from Greece’s hiring of Wall Street firms to hide its debt to the country’s retirement age (in Germany, 67, in Greece, 61). In turn, Greeks have accused German papers of racism and western European leaders of paternalism. Yesterday, a 60,000-person strike shut down Athens and turned violent, Theodoros Pangalos, the deputy prime minister of Greece, brought history into it. In an interview with BBC radio, he invoked the 1941 Nazi invasion of Greece, which caused an estimated 300,000 deaths. – FP Passport
Dominant Social Theme: It will turn out all right in the end.
Free-Market Analysis: Actually we’re not too sure where the tussle between Greece and Germany is going to end up. It could easily be an early warning signal of the dissolution of the EU. Or perhaps the IMF could step in. Or Germany could eventually bail Greece out, and then other countries as necessary. This is the difficulty with analyzing power elite memes in a time of confusion. The Internet, in our opinion, has thrown everything out of whack and, in the short term anyway, figuring out where the world is headed is a most difficult proposition.
Used to be there was little problem in understanding good investment bets if you understood the way the world worked. Even if you didn’t absolutely understand dominant social themes and their implementation, you could still likely sniff which way events were headed by watching how players lined up. Take global warming. The savvy investors would have seen the UN and the EU getting behind it, would have discerned the creation of carbon-trading markets – even before the fact – and witnessed massive international gabfests creating global understandings that would eventually result in a formal enterprise.
But somewhere between then and now, global warming got snagged. Today the idea of carbon trading seems a lot further off than it did even six months ago. Companies are backing away from the concepts and those who have invested literally decades in preparing for massive international carbon trading business are facing steep losses.
And then there is green industry. GM, for instance, is betting on small, fuel-efficient cars that offer a lower carbon footprint. But when people are polled these days, especially in America and Britain, global warming comes in at virtually last place in terms of people’s concerns. GM may be making a bad bet – and all car companies rushing toward small, low-carbon cars may have misinterpreted the market – and the clout of the power elite in the Internet era.
There are plenty of other memes in our opinion that are in trouble. We think the central banking theme is doing poorly these days. We think the “one world/one financial regulator” meme is having difficulty grabbing traction. Regulations and regulators themselves are in poor odor. We believe that peak oil and other scarcity memes are not making the headway they once were. We believe that in America especially the military industrial dominant social themes – the war on terror, Islamofascism and the 9/11 attacks – are coming under scrutiny as well. We have the suspicion that almost every dominant social theme launched by the elite will find hard slogging in the early 21st century. That makes investing and generally planning for the future a lot more difficult than it used to be.
Back to the EU. In Europe one is faced with the massed power of the bureaucracy and generational wealth on one side and common-sense observation on the other. Practical observation tells us that the EU is an absurd and ludicrous invention that cannot possibly stand, especially without a strong political union to accompany the economic one. Now there is agitation for such, but one gets the feeling it may be too late. The antipathy to the EU is internalized and the European street itself has had enough of these power grabs. Are the Greeks really going to go along with turning their country over to Germany and, by definition, Brussels?
One can speak all that one wants to about the stability of the currency, the low interest rates and discipline that the euro has brought to the market. But in fact, the idea of melding Europe’s fractious nation states into a “union” was always a far-fetched idea and the underhanded way that it occurred has made the current crisis worse because there is no social compact on which to fall back. There is no deep reservoir of good will. Bribes and threats only go so far. Here’s some more from the article:
“[The Nazis] took away the Greek gold that was at the Bank of Greece,” [said Theodoros Pangalos, the deputy prime minister of Greece.] “They took away the Greek money and they never gave it back. This is an issue that has to be faced sometime in the future. I don’t say they have to give back the money necessarily but they have at least to say “thanks.” And they shouldn’t complain so much about stealing and not being very specific about economic dealings.
… The Greeks don’t want German help, and the Germans don’t want to have to give it to them. But, the alternative is mass unemployment and emigration, deep cuts to social services, and a prolonged depression. … Even moderate austerity measures combined with very high taxes on the rich, the Greek populist proposal, simply will not work. … Angela Merkel saying “Thanks for the gold!” [will] not go down well in Athens at all.
It is not just Greece that Germany has to bail out. Little Dubai’s flirtation with bankruptcy turned out to be a big problem for the West. Greece is said to be a “little” country too, but it is a lot bigger than Dubai. And Italy and Spain are a lot bigger than Greece. We cannot imagine the havoc in international markets if these nations begin to visibly fail. So – you decide, perhaps – they will be bailed out because they must be. But who is to do so? Where does all the bailout money come from?
We are as puzzled as you, dear reader. Whether it is global warming, the EU unraveling or even something slightly more mundane such as the health care program in the US, power elite promotions seem to be foundering. Centralization and regulation do not seem an entirely sure thing anymore. Certainly some who read the Bell and other alternative news sites will continue to believe that the elite is an unstoppable force and that the current difficulties are mere speed-bumps in a relentless march toward global centralization.
We don’t think it’s nearly so simple, though, and there are a growing number of others, we believe, who share our conclusions. Blame it on the truth-telling alternative media sites thriving on the Internet. The Internet is a modern Gutenberg press and that invention played havoc with the powers-that-be of the time. Today, from an investing standpoint, things have never been so confused.
Will central banks continue to stimulate markets? Perhaps, but central banking is under attack as never before, and the leveraging of the business cycle may not be nearly so efficient this time around (and thus stock market accruals may be far less dependable than in the past). Fiat money itself – a primary promotion of the elite – is under attack as well, with more and more questioning the West’s fundamental money structure.
Conclusion: Are you an investor? What are you going to do in this modern era? Where are you going to turn? Some are investing a portion of their assets in gold and silver. That’s been a good bet and may continue to be. The point is, with power elite promotions unraveling – if indeed you believe they are – the trends that one could count on are unraveling as well. For those who want certainty, the early 21st century may unfortunately provide little.
Jamie keys off the latest column from patriot Paul Craig Roberts, in which Roberts pays tribute to the 1,000 professional architects and engineers who have banded together to demand a grand jury investigation of the fraud perpetrated by the 9/11 Commission under Shyam Sunder and Philip Zelikow. As we honor the defenders of the Alamo on the 174th anniversary of their 1836 fight against Mexican tyranny, Roberts and ae911 founder Richard Gage point out that our own government has fallen under the control of cowards who are guilty of “misprision of treason” (U.S.Code 18 – Section 2382).
There are times in life when one witnesses something so outside the scope of normal experience, that at first you don’t see it.
Captain Cook’s diaries tell us that upon first seeing his ships offshore in Australia, the aborigines expressed “neither surprise nor concern.” Cook notes that it was not until he and his men approached the shore in smaller, more familiar vessels that the villagers reacted, arming themselves as “the sight of men in small boats was comprehensible to them: it meant invasion.”
Well, I had a similar experience during yesterday’s bond auction. Before going into the details, we need to fully explain how a Treasury Auction works.
First the Treasury issues a press release saying just how much debt is being issued (sold) during a given auction. This release also says how much of the Treasuries currently owned by the Federal Reserve are coming due that day, the implication being that the Fed will likely use the funds from their maturing Treasuries to buy some of the new debt issuance.
When it comes time for the auction, investors can either bid non-competitively (meaning they’ll take whatever yield is available based on demand) or competitively (meaning they have a minimum yield requirement and won’t buy the debt if it yields less). Non-compete bids are accepted first. After them comes the competitive bids until the total debt issuance is complete.
So let’s say the Treasury is issuing $10 billion in ten-year notes. On the day of the auction, the lowest competitive bid states it won’t accept anything under a 3% yield. So, the Treasury starts filling non-competitive bids at 3%. Once all the non-competes are filled, the Treasury starts filling the competitive bids in the order of increasing yields (so those competitive orders requiring a 3% yield are filled before those requiring a 3.5% yield) until the total debt issuance is met.
Once the Treasury auction is complete, the Treasury issues a press release stating the highest accepted yield and the amount of Treasuries sold to non-competitive bidders. The Treasury also reveals what percentage of competitive bids occurred with each of the three bidders. These are:
1) Primary Dealers: those banks/ financial institutions that trade directly with the Federal Reserve bank of NY (and so HAVE to buy Treasuries at auction)
2) Direct bidders: those investors who place their bids directly with the Treasury (also the easily track-able orders)
3) Indirect bidders: those investors who place their orders through direct bidders (untraceable orders or orders made by buyers that cannot be tracked)
I realize this sounds complicated. The main issues are that the Treasury issues debt. Some folks take it at whatever price they can. Some folks buy it only if it yields as much as they want.
The Treasury first sells the debt to those who don’t care what it yields (at the lowest yield the folks who DO care what it yields are willing to accept) and then issues the remaining debt to those who DO care what it yields first at the lowest yield accepted and then at higher yields.
Finally, of the folks who buy, some buy right from the Treasury (directs), others buy through intermediaries (indirects). And if there aren’t enough of either, the Primary Dealers step in and buy the rest.
Ok, now onto yesterday’s auction.
Yesterday the Treasury issued $37 billion worth of four-week notes (meaning debt that comes due in four weeks). The lowest yield accepted was 0.0000% (literally NO yield) and the highest yield accepted was 0.055% (virtually nothing).
Roughly, 27% of the auction took place at the highest rate. This means nearly one third of the demand from competitive bidders (those who care about yield) came at the HIGHEST yield that was accepted. In plain terms, this alone tells you that investors want higher yields from Treasuries since nearly a full third of the debt issuance took place at the highest REQUIRED yield.
As you would expect, there were few non-competitive bids (who in their right mind is willing to buy US debt without caring about the yield?): non-competes only made up less than 1% of the bids. In contrast competitive bids made up 97% of the demand.
Now here’s where things get odd.
Of the competitive bids (meaning those bids coming from folks who care about yield), roughly 70% went to Primary Dealers (investors who HAVE to buy the debt and who usually turn around and try to sell it afterwards). To put this number into perspective here is the percentage of competitive purchases made by Primary Dealers in the last four 4-week Treasury issuances: Date of 4-Week Treasury Auction
Primary Dealers as % of Competitive Buys
January 5 2010
January 12 2010
January 20 2010
January 26 2010
February 2 2010
February 9 2010
February 17 2010
February 23 2010 (yesterday)
You’ll note that during the stock market correction that took place during the end of January/ beginning of February, Primary Dealers didn’t need to buy many Treasuries since investors were fleeing stocks and buying short-term Treasury debt as a safe haven.
You’ll also notice that yesterday’s auction featured MORE buys from Primary Dealers than almost any of those occurring in 2010. Remember, Primary Dealers HAVE to buy Treasuries. So to see them buying a high percentage of Treasuries at debt auctions means that few investors who can pick and choose what to buy are actually looking to buy US debt.
In plain terms, a debt auction that features a high percentage of competitive buys coming from Primary Dealers is BAD NEWS. It means investors generally aren’t buying US debt. It also means that foreign governments (those who have funded US debt auctions for decades) aren’t buying much anymore either.
So the fact we’ve have three short-term auctions in which more than two thirds of competitive buys came from Primary Dealers is worrisome to see the least.
Now here’s where it gets even worse.
Of the remaining competitive buys (about $8.86 billion), only 32% came from Direct Bidders or those who bought debt directly from the Treasury: orders that can easily be tracked. The other 68% ($5.9 billion) came from Indirect Bidders: folks who we cannot track.
Even more bizarre, only $5.9 billion in Indirect Bidder competitive buys were ACTUALLY OFFERED. So we had a 100% acceptance rate for Indirect Bidder competitive buys.
Let’s put this in perspective:
Date of 4-Week Treasury Auction
Indirect Bidder Acceptance Rate
January 5 2010
January 12 2010
January 20 2010
January 26 2010
February 2 2010
February 9 2010
February 17 2010
February 23 2010 (yesterday)
This means that the Treasury took up EVERY single cent of competitive bids coming from indirect buyers. Remember, indirect buyers are usually assumed to be foreign governments (even the Treasury website admits this).
If this was the case yesterday, then foreign governments barely bought much of anything in yesterday’s auction (only 19% of total debt issued). Moreover, it implies that Primary Dealers (those having to buy) had to gorge on the auction to make up for the fact that few if any foreign governments are interested in buying our debt anymore (including even short-term debt).
One could potentially argue that this indirect buying came from the Fed covertly buying under the guise of an indirect bidder (the Treasury recently changed the definition of what qualifies for an indirect bidder to make it more vague). It IS rather odd that every single cent of competitive bidding coming from indirect buyers was filled. It’s almost as if the indirect buyers knew precisely WHAT yield to accept… OR were simply trying to take up the slack in what was already a VERY weak auction.
I cannot tell you which of the above is true. Heck, neither of them could be and something completely different could be happening. But regardless, something very, VERY strange is going on in US debt auctions.
I wrote earlier this year that bonds, not stocks, would be the big story of 2010. We’re only into February and there are already some very unusual things happening on both the long (30 year) and the short (4 week) ends of the Treasury curve. And with the Fed’s Quantitative Easing Program scheduled to end in March, things are about to get a whole lot more interesting (barring of course an extension of the QE or QE 2.0).
Keep your eye on US Treasuries. Stocks, despite being so popular with investors are usually the LAST to get what’s coming down the pike. And investors just parked $30 billion for a month with Uncle Sam at virtually NO YIELD yesterday.
Put another way, someone(s) is/are willing to not make money just for the sake of insuring return OF capital (the US can always print money to return it) rather than any return ON capital.
The denial of the Holocaust will be punishable by law under a bill passed by Parliament on Monday afternoon.
Those who publicly deny the Holocaust, call it into doubt or present it as insignificant may be sentenced to up to three years in prison.
The motion submitted by Socialist prime ministerial candidate Attila Mesterházy was passed with 197 votes in favour, one dissension and 144 abstentions. Free Democrat József Gulyás was the lone dissenter; Fidesz MPs abstained.
If President László Sólyom signs the bill into law, it will enter into force 30 days later.
Fidesz submitted a motion to criminalise the public denial of crimes against humanity committed by communist as well as fascist regimes but Parliament rejected it by a vote of 178-146.
Mazsihisz president Péter Feldmájer, executive director Gusztáv Zoltai and several Holocaust survivors attended the voting at the invitation of the Socialist Party.
Parliament later made participation in the leadership of a dissolved social organisation punishable by up to three years in prison, raising the seriousness of such activity from a misdemeanour to a crime. The bill was passed by 177 affirmative votes and 140 abstentions, as Fidesz did not support it.
When it comes to climate change, some look at the facts presented and see a coming catastrophe, others see a hoax. This difference in interpretation, social scientists say, has more to do with each individual’s existing outlook than the facts.
When it comes to climate change, some look at the facts presented and see a coming catastrophe, others see a hoax. This difference in interpretation, social scientists say, has more to do with each individual’s existing outlook than the facts.
Over the past few months, polls show that fewer Americans say they believe humans are making the planet dangerously warmer, despite a raft of scientific reports that say otherwise.
This puzzles many climate scientists — but not some social scientists, whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs.
Take, for example, a recent debate about climate change on West Virginia public radio.
West Virginia Public Broadcasting
“It’s a hoax,” said coal company CEO Don Blankenship, “because clearly anyone that says that they know what the temperature of the Earth is going to be in 2020 or 2030 needs to be put in an asylum because they don’t.”
On the other side of the debate was environmentalist Robert Kennedy, Jr.
“Ninety-eight percent of the research climatologists in the world say that global warming is real, that its impacts are going to be catastrophic,” he argued. “There are 2 percent who disagree with that. I have a choice of believing the 98 percent or the 2 percent.”
Individualists And Communitarians
To social scientist and lawyer Don Braman, it’s not surprising that two people can disagree so strongly over science. Braman is on the faculty at George Washington University and part of The Cultural Cognition Project, a group of scholars who study how cultural values shape public perceptions and policy beliefs.
“People tend to conform their factual beliefs to ones that are consistent with their cultural outlook, their world view,” Braman says.
The Cultural Cognition Project has conducted several experiments to back that up.
Participants in these experiments are asked to describe their cultural beliefs. Some embrace new technology, authority and free enterprise. They are labeled the “individualistic” group. Others are suspicious of authority or of commerce and industry. Braman calls them “communitarians.”
In one experiment, Braman queried these subjects about something unfamiliar to them: nanotechnology — new research into tiny, molecule-sized objects that could lead to novel products.
“These two groups start to polarize as soon as you start to describe some of the potential benefits and harms,” Braman says.
The individualists tended to like nanotechnology. The communitarians generally viewed it as dangerous. Both groups made their decisions based on the same information.
“It doesn’t matter whether you show them negative or positive information, they reject the information that is contrary to what they would like to believe, and they glom onto the positive information,” Braman says.
Rejecting Information That Threatens Beliefs
So, what’s going on here?
“Basically the reason that people react in a close-minded way to information is that the implications of it threaten their values,” says Dan Kahan, a law professor at Yale University and a member of The Cultural Cognition Project.
Kahan says people test new information against their preexisting view of how the world should work.
“If the implication, the outcome, can affirm your values, you think about it in a much more open-minded way,” he says.
And if the information doesn’t, you tend to reject it.
In another experiment, people read a United Nations study about the dangers of global warming. Then the researchers told the participants that the solution to global warming is to regulate industrial pollution. Many in the individualistic group then rejected the climate science. But when more nuclear power was offered as the solution, says Braman, “they said, you know, it turns out global warming is a serious problem.”
And for the communitarians, climate danger seemed less serious if the only solution was more nuclear power.
The ‘Messenger’ Effect
Then there’s the “messenger” effect. In an experiment dealing with the dangers versus benefits of a vaccine, the scientific information came from several people. They ranged from a rumpled and bearded expert to a crisply business-like one. The participants tended to believe the message that came from the person they considered to be more like them.
In relation to the climate change debate, this suggests that some people may not listen to those whom they view as hard-core environmentalists.
“If you have people who are skeptical of the data on climate change,” Braman says, “you can bet that Al Gore is not going to convince them at this point.”
So, should climate scientists hire, say, Newt Gingrich as their spokesman? Kahan says no.
“The goal can’t be to create a kind of psychological house of mirrors so that people end up seeing exactly what you want,” he argues. “The goal has to be to create an environment that allows them to be open-minded.”
And Kahan says you can’t do that just by publishing more scientific data.
Don Wassall, publisher of The Nationalist Times is our guest on The Jamie Kelso Show for Feb. 25, 2010. We get a preview of Issue No. 267 of this patriot newspaper, now in its 25th year of publication. Which bnings to mind a comparison with Wilmot Robertson’s Instauration magazine, which was also published for 25 years from 1975 to 2000. While leafing through some 1988 and 1989 issues of Instauration we come across mentions of Don Wassall’s work then as director of the Populist Party. Jamie Kelso invites listeners to take a look at issues of Instauration. Eventually the entirety of Instauration will be scanned and uploaded in an official edition by the Instauration copyright holders.
Tom interviews Friedrich Paul Berg, an accomplished revisionist historian. Tom and Mr. Berg discuss:
The alleged use of diesel exhaust as a means of killing concentration camp detainees in war-torn Germany. Mr. Berg straightforwardly and rationally dismisses this assertion as “pure rubbish.”
How mainstream holocaust historians use only eyewitness accounts with no corroborating hard evidence to justify their claims. Mr. Berg demonstrates how the well-documented mountain of forensic evidence indisputably denies the possibility of homicidal gas chambers.
The scholarly blind spots that mainstream and revisionist historians have regarding the technology used and not used by Germany during the war years.
The holocaust as not only a new religion but a “collective insanity” which maliciously views those who oppose the prevailing orthodoxy as “heretics.”
The use of the holocaust issue as an excuse for a rapid descent into more future wars. The best current example being another war in the Middle East with Iran.
About Friedrich Paul Berg
To learn more about Friedrich Paul Berg and his informed perspective you can view his extensive body of work at his personal website.
Jamie is able to get on the air live on Feb. 22 to report on three very encouraging Washington, D.C. projects on which he has been engaged for almost a week: the American Renaissance Conference, the Conservative Political Action Conference, and three patriot road trip tours this last week that include the U.S. Capitol, our Bill of Rights in our Archives, Lindbergh’s Spirit of St. Louis suspended from the ceiling of James Smithson’s Smithsonian.
AUSTIN, Texas—The pilot of a small plane that slammed into a building here Thursday morning might have deliberately targeted the offices of the Internal Revenue Service after a tax dispute, federal officials said.
Smoke billows from a building after a small private plane crashed there.
The pilot, Joseph Stack, 53 years old, appears to have been the same person who posted an anti-government manifesto Thursday on the Internet, suggesting he planned the crash, government officials said, though it was too early to be sure.
“Violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer,” the person signing himself Joe Stack wrote toward the end of a tirade against the IRS posted on his Web site. He described himself as a contract software engineer.
The crash, which apparently killed the pilot, sent two men in the offices to the hospital with burns. An IRS manager was missing after the incident, according to one of his colleagues, Richard Lee. Police said they continued to search the Echelon building, where about 190 IRS employees worked.
The crash came about an hour after an explosion at Mr. Stack’s home shortly before 9 a.m. in a subdivision a few miles from the crash site, according to neighbors. The house was quickly engulfed in flames.
Mr. Stack’s family declined to comment, according to police officers answering the door at a house across the street from the burned-out home.
Mr. Stack’s single-engine Piper Cherokee took off from Georgetown, north of Austin, at 9:40 a.m., according to the Federal Aviation Administration. The crash sent a plume of dark smoke into the air and caused highway shutdowns about 10 miles north of the state capitol.
The North American Aerospace Defense Command launched two F-16 fighter aircraft to patrol the air after the crash. Spokesman Jamie Graybeal called it “a prudent precaution and consistent with our response to recent similar air incidents.”
The White House said that President Barack Obama was briefed on the plane crash after noon, and that the incident didn’t appear to be terrorism-related.
Witnesses said they saw the plane approaching the office building, which sits next to a six-lane east-west corridor in an area populated by high-end shops.
Matt Downs, a software salesman with offices about a quarter of a mile away, said the plane banked at high speed with the engine at full throttle. Then came the impact, and a big plume of smoke. The plane hit between the second and third floors of the dark-glass building, one of four buildings in a complex.
“The whole building shook; it felt like a car hit our building,” said Camille Ziegelhofer, who works at a software company in an adjacent building to the crash.
Mr. Lee, the IRS manager, said the explosion blew out the windows and knocked him to the floor, bruising his back. He helped others in the building get out, he said, but couldn’t get to part of his floor because of neck-high flames.
In a note posted online at EmbeddedArt.com, a writer who identified himself as Joe Stack complained bitterly about the IRS, blaming the agency for eroding his retirement savings and causing him other financial troubles.
Mr. Stack, who described himself as a recently married, struggling, contract software engineer, said in the posting that he left Los Angeles, where he couldn’t find work, but that he didn’t have much better luck in Austin.
Because of his expenses and lack of income, he didn’t file a tax return, prompting an IRS audit that cost him $10,000, he wrote, and he had other problems involving unreported income.
He signed it off with this: “Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.”
After that, he included his name and what appear to be the years of his birth and death: 1956-2010.
One of the most popular videos on the internet right now — the initial Youtube clip now has 654,889 views, literally overnight, and it’s climbing fast — features a conflict between a negro thug and his 67-year-old would-be victim, a White man (not simply a male, like so many capons) by the name of Thomas Bruso, which took place on a Bay Area bus in broad daylight.
After a misunderstanding arising from the young negro’s insistence on mumbling pidgin and perpetuated by his aggressiveness, he threatens the elderly white man several times with violence. The White man inquires why the negro insists on being so hostile, then states clearly that there is some sort of misunderstanding, and relocates to the front of the bus. He makes every effort to avoid violence short of jumping off the moving bus or grovelling for mercy, which would only have encouraged his cowardly attacker. The negro male responds by walking to the front of the bus and taking a swing at the White gentleman, which does not turn out as he expected.
A young negress seated next to both parties, who was filming the incident, urges on her co-ethnic with chants such as, “beat his White ass” and taunts the elderly White man by screaming things like, “say it again, Pinky!” When the 67-year-old White fellow not only defends himself, but does so effectively, she launches into feigned expressions of horror and urges her fellow negro to press charges against the senior citizen. Bleeding profusely, the thwarted thug continues to mouth threats through his busted lip while calling for the “ambulance,” which has turned into the popular facebook/youtube meme “amber lamps” due to his ebonic inflection. She finishes up her video by stealing the old guy’s fanny pack, which he had inadvertently left on the bus in the wake of the struggle.
Thomas Bruso, a Vietnam veteran now known on the internet as Epic Beard Man, has become an overnight folk hero to hundreds of thousands of White Americans who are tired of being perpetual victims of violent hate crimes in their own land. It is my sincere hope that this number continues to grow until his deeds are cemented in the memory of millions of Americans, who may begin asking some uncomfortable questions that the regime simply cannot answer. Jared Taylor uses the term “racial realism” for a very good reason: the facts of the matter truly are indisputable and self-evident to every realistic man on the street who is willing to be honest with himself.
[Warning: Video contains strong language and graphic violence.]
The woman who filmed the incident appeared on TV news to discuss it:
She also issued a public apology on Youtube in which she asserts that she did not steal EBM’s bag. She claims that she has been getting “hammered” by bloggers and comments on youtube, which appears to be true (and very well deserved) if the responses posted to that apology are any indication. 99% of those leaving comments call her out on the fact that she is lying through her teeth and did her best to perpetuate violence against Mr. Bruso. Here is her unsuccessful attempt to “clear her name:”
Important Update: I just spoke with Andrew Yeoman of the Bay Area National Anarchists, who reports that EBM has been arrested in relation to this incident and he is currently in custody. The exact nature of the charges against him are unknown at this point, but I will provide updates as they become available. Andrew and his BANA comrades have mobilised quickly in support of EBM and they are busy preparing for nationwide protests against this injustice. If you wish to assist BANA in this endeavour, contact Andrew at email@example.com.
Heartened by the recent rise in home prices? Don’t get too comfortable. Standard & Poor’s, the credit-rating agency that tells investors what mortgage-backed securities are worth, reports that the increase was just an illusion. It predicts the nation is about to see a deluge of new foreclosures that will drive real estate values back down.
Blame the “shadow inventory” – nearly 1.8 million homes that are on the road to foreclosure but for all kinds of reasons haven’t gotten there yet.
Many homeowners have fallen behind on their mortgages or stopped paying, but foreclosure has not yet arrived. Mortgage servicers, the folks who send you the bills and file for foreclosure when you can’t pay them, are overwhelmed. Courts, too, are backed up. Mortgage modifications and foreclosure moratoriums have put off the day of reckoning for borrowers, but not forever. And unemployment is sabotaging more homeowners every day.
Out of more than $1.6 trillion in existing mortgages that were packaged into mortgage-backed securities by Wall Street, some $425 billion worth are extremely late on their payments, and therefore likely to go into foreclosure. Only a fraction of borrowers who fall seriously behind are able to catch up, with the help of a loan modification. And even then the majority end up falling behind again. That amount of bad mortgage debt has been spiking up every month, slowing down just a little thanks to the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program, but still continuing to rise.
Meanwhile, even as the amount of unpaid mortgage debt rises, the number of foreclosed, bank-owned homes for sale has been holding fairly steady. That tells us that the number of foreclosures for sale on the market is actually just a sliver of all the ones that are really out there. S&P’s chilling conclusion: “Overall, it is our opinion that recent positive housing reports should not be construed as a sign that the distress in the residential housing market is abating, but rather should be attributed to the temporarily limited supply of homes on the market.”
The bottom line: just counting the homeowners who are currently behind on their mortgages, along with the existing number of foreclosures for sale, at the current pace it will take nearly three years to sell all the foreclosures out there. That doesn’t include all the borrowers who haven’t fallen behind yet but are going to, because of unemployment or because their Option ARM payments are spiking up or because they just decide to stop paying.
The shadow inventory is equal to half the size of the entire market of homes for sale. When it starts getting listed, expect home prices in areas with lots of foreclosures to plummet. Yes, more.
Mike Conner & Mishko Novosel interview Alaric Pfeiffer of europanetwork.org. Alaric is a journalist who reported on the Feb. 13 memorial march for the victims of the Dresden bombing. Topics include:
A recounting of the Allies’ tragic 1945 bombing of Dresden, and the criminal nature of that bombing
The motivations of the marchers, and the peaceful, solemn, democratic nature of their memorial march
How the police, particularly the German Federal police — not the “antifascist” protesters — were the primary force thwarting the march
How the police thwarted the march in defiance of Saxony’s Supreme Court’s ruling that the march was legal and democratic; how police overriding the civil authority is the textbook definition of a police state, and not of a democracy.
Prospects for the future: Why the marches will continue, and why police state tactics will eventually fail in eastern Germany.
About Alaric Pfeiffer
For more info on Alaric’s coverage of the Dresden march, please visit www.europanetwork.org to view videos on the march.
Tom interviews accomplished writer and thinker F. Roger Devlin, a member of the Editorial Advisory Board for The Occidental Quarterly. Topics include:
The philosophy of Alexander Kojeve
Leftist tropes like “History is Over” and “The End of History”
Traditional gender roles as fundamental obstacles to the Leftism; feminism
Solzhenitsyn’s last and most powerful book, Two Hundred Years Together
About F. Roger Devlin
To learn more about F. Roger Devlin and his unique perspective read his insightful essays at The Occidental Quarterly, TOQonline and VDARE. His important book Alexandre Kojeve and the Outcome of Modern Thought can be found here on Amazon.
Jamie covers the stunningly good news that Jared Taylor has rescued his American Renaissance Conference (register here) for this coming weekend of Feb. 19-21 in downtown Washington, DC. Patriots all over America and the White world are spreading the word that the event which foes of free speech and of White self-determination thought they had cancelled will go on. Don Wassall, publisher of The Nationalist Times, and Caste Football, shares the great news with us in our final segment.