Enlightened Free-Loaders and the Pathological Altruists Who Love Them – Weaponized Honesty, Trump, and the New Right

“I am just a vigilant citizen
In a house that no one is living in

I am just a vigilant citizen
In a bed that everyone’s pissing in”-Cruel Hand, “Vigilant Citizen”

“Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.”-Aristotle

What is it about European civilization, and the Anglo-Saxon tradition in particular, that makes it so unique in the history of the world? There is a stunning cathedral in the center of York, England, called the York Minster that offers the perfect metaphor. Originally a Roman fortress, in 627 AD a wooden church was hurriedly constructed to be able to baptize King Edwin of Northumbria. A more permanent, but still humble, church was eventually erected, but it burned down in 741; a much more ambitious church with thirty altars was constructed on the site, and lasted until its severe damage in 1069 during William the Conqueror’s Harrying of the North and its ultimate destruction in 1075 by a Danish Viking raid. From 1080 another church was built in the Norman style. The present structure, which took over two hundred years to construct (1230-1472), is Gothic in style and sits on the Roman, Anglo-Saxon, and Norman foundations that came before. Given its size, intricacy, centrality, and importance, the cathedral requires consistent maintenance and renovation in order to preserve it in all its grandeur, but the expense is more than worth it to honor the region’s history and to be able to awe oneself in the presence of the cathedral’s stained glass, opulent ornamentation, magnificent architecture, and tombs of seminal religious and political figures. Visiting the Minster, you can time travel the two thousand years below the cathedral through the previous foundations and their artifacts, and climb the central tower to see the still-intact medieval walls of York and the nearly one thousand-year-old Clifford’s Tower that still stands on its outskirts.

The diligence, respect, patience, talent, faith, and cooperation it takes to create and maintain such a house of worship across many lifetimes is really a testament to civilizational pride and religious devotion, a true labor of love, and it speaks to something deep and profound in the Western psyche. I’ve written at length about the various contributing threads that have inter-woven over the course of the development of the West, but there’s one key factor that I haven’t considered in its entirety yet, mostly because it is a bit more nebulous and I needed to do much more research in order to speak with some “authority” on it, and that would be the role of giving, cooperation, and altruism.

The evidence for altruism having a strong biological component is mounting, and its occurrence varies across different races. Whites seem to have the highest levels of altruism, and are unique among the races for their de-emphasis on kinship and re-orientation of society to a more person-to-person “contractual” system, whereby cooperation between non-familial societal sub-groups and individuals takes on extra importance. To be sure, familial ties remain central to the organization of white societies, but beyond the immediate family, the ties, generally speaking, rapidly diminish. In Infidel, Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote about the kin system in Somalia, where everyone was expected to know their lineage ten or twenty generations in the past as a form of social organization and hierarchy, which could certainly be a source of strength and function both as a “networking tool” and as its own kind of welfare system in times of need, but could also in times of instability, such as the Somali civil war, turn into a tribal nightmare. The kin system is not conducive to building a modern nation-state.

Kin selection is just one mechanism in the evolution of cooperation, which also involves three different kinds of reciprocity, a “guardian function,” and group selection, which with the de-emphasis of kinship in Western societies allowed for voluntary association and hence a much greater degree of cooperation, which in turn allowed for the development of more complex social, political, and economic systems. Coupled with the genetic impulse among whites to be more altruistic than other groups—perhaps owing to climatic factors, but more research needs to be done here—the ready embrace of Christianity conjoined with the unique and varying local pagan customs, rituals, and spirituality, helped facilitate an extreme emphasis on the individual and stands in stark contrast to Jewish and Islamic tribalism, though Judaism is much more insular than either as it is not a proselytizing religion and has its own ethnic component. With these considerations we can clearly see why Western civilization surged ahead of its competitors once the free market began to take root after the Black Death and as the works of luminaries such as Chaucer, Boccaccio, Dante, and Petrarch writing in the vernacular in the High Middle Ages melded with the Renaissance of classical antiquity’s intellectual and artistic traditions, and were widely dispersed following the invention of the printing press. This double fusion—first of Christianity with local paganism, then with a re-discovery and advancement of the ideas and ideals of classical antiquity—imbued Europe with tremendous energy and brought it to the doorstep of modernity.

Somewhere along the line, however, the altruistic cooperation that was once so central to the development of Western civilization became a monstrous Catholic-Guilt-on-steroids; the reversion to Christian universalism and abandonment of the pagan infusion of what is essentially an alien faith, often unconsciously received, became whites’ Achilles heel. To quote Barbara A. Oakley:

For cooperative behavior to continue in complex biological or sociological entities, that is, for entities not to fall prey to ever-present, ever-evolving defectors, some form of evolving active guardian function must be present that detects when debilitating or destructive advantage is being taken of cooperative or altruistic behavior. The guardian system must not only detect but also disable such noncooperative behavior or render the entity immune to the pernicious effects. Without such detection and mitigation mechanisms, we see modeled evolutionary entities that are wiped out by defectors (note: emphasis added).[1]

These mechanisms are no longer present, and the defectors are eating away at the Western organism. These are the “enlightened free-loaders,” and we are the guilt-ridden “pathological altruists” who enable them. Metapedia defines pathological altruism as: “Sincere attempts to help others that instead harms others or oneself and where this harm could have been reasonably anticipated. It is often caused by cognitive and/or emotional biases that blind people to the potentially harmful consequences of their actions.” Our immune system is down and the carrion of our civilization is up for grabs. In fact, we’ll help you strip the carcass bare! As Mark Steyn says, “You don’t extinguish prudence for utopian delusions,” but that’s precisely what we’ve done. Pathological altruism and rampant white guilt under the manipulative guise of “liberalism” have enabled the transformation of the politics of the West—and the tributary of big-government-favoring Third World immigrants—into a kind of racial spoils system. This malignant form of liberalism, which is really not liberalism at all, is founded on premises closely hewing to Original Sin. That said, for Shelby Steele:

White guilt is not actual guilt…White guilt is not angst over injustices suffered by others; it is the terror of being stigmatized with America’s old bigotries—racism, sexism, homophobia and xenophobia. To be stigmatized as a fellow traveler with any of these bigotries is to be utterly stripped of moral authority and made into a pariah. The terror of this, of having “no name in the street” as the Bible puts it, pressures whites to act guiltily even when they feel no actual guilt. White guilt is a mock guilt, a pretense of real guilt, a shallow etiquette of empathy, pity and regret. It is also the heart and soul of contemporary liberalism. This liberalism is the politics given to us by white guilt, and it shares white guilt’s central corruption. It is not real liberalism, in the classic sense. It is a mock liberalism. Freedom is not its raison d’être; moral authority is…Without an ugly America to loathe, there is no automatic esteem to receive. Thus liberalism’s unrelenting current of anti-Americanism…This is moral esteem over reality; the self-congratulation of idealism. Liberalism is exhausted because it has become a corruption.[2]

What passes for liberalism in the United States today, and indeed much of the rest of the West, is a useful racial and tribal extortion racket for non-whites. Our political process is becoming a farce as we pantomime our commitment to what this great experiment in self-determination was meant to be. There is perhaps no one more emblematic of this than the mawkish ((((((Chuck Schumer)))))), incessantly whining and crying on television for some new entitlement or welfare program—or some stripping away of civil rights—in the name of COMPASSION and THE CHILDREN. It’s a cheap trick, but it works on the whites either already afflicted with an altruistic pathology or on those so encumbered by the guilt they’ve been marinated in their entire lives, they’ll willfully let the government cleave off half their paycheck so as to not be called racist. As Kevin Jackson says, “Race pimping has cost America trillions of dollars, as the money in race guilt is fantastic. Politicians line their pockets and those of family and friends, while delivering little to nothing to their constituents or the community at large.” ((((((Schumer)))))) and Company are living high on the hog (unless they’re kosher, in which case they’re living high on the New York bagel with cream cheese, lox, and capers), race-baiting their way to the bank.

Never mind that, pace Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson, “The sociological truths are that America, while still flawed in its race relations … is now the least racist white-majority society in the world; has a better record of legal protection of minorities than any other society, white or black; offers more opportunities to a greater number of black persons than any other society, including all those of Africa.” No, the present dogma holds that there is something fundamentally cruel and insidious about the United States, deep-seated sins that must be atoned for, from its legacy of slavery to its legacy of colonialism. “That leads me to make several elephant-in-the-room observations,” says Sherriff David Clarke:

These “news” reports are followed by coverage of race hustlers calling for a “national discussion on race.” Provocateurs demand that all white Americans engage in self-flagellation, confess to false accusations of harboring racist feelings and admit that America is racist to the core. Like Pavlov’s dogs, many Republican politicians begin rushing to the nearest camera to flaunt their racial sensitivity…Do we allow false accusers to commit a criminal act and escape accountability? Not prosecuting a crime encourages others to commit similar offenses…Everyone is encouraged to feel aggrieved (everyone except white males). If no feeling exists, fantasize and make one up.[3]

Thanks to American Renaissance, we know that there were over one hundred hate crime hoaxes in the U.S. between when Donald Trump announced his candidacy in June 2015 and the close of 2017. There are tremendous privileges afforded the victims of hate crimes, and the mass outpouring of media coverage, money, and—you guessed it—empathy incentivize minorities to fabricate these crimes in order to be a beneficiary of the White Guilt Industrial Complex. What’s more, there’s virtually no downside, as when the hate crimes are revealed as hoaxes, with maybe one or two exceptions, the individuals in question receive at worst a slap on the wrist. Contrasting sharply with the narrative of “white privilege,” Gregory Hood makes the observation that, “Political power comes from shedding the imagined privileges of whiteness, and securing the actual privileges of non-whiteness.” None other than Linda Sarsour proved his thesis when she said, “When I wasn’t wearing a hijab I was just some ordinary white girl from New York City.” This is really deranged when you step back from the hysteria and think about it, and the gruesome twosome of guilt culture and pathological altruism is not confined to the United States by any means. It is a pan-Western epidemic of guilt assuagement with no set number of Hail Mary’s to affect clemency and a suicidal selflessness cresting a wave of giving-giving-giving-induced endorphins. Clearly the guilt-motivated penance, the pathology of altruism, and the imagined moral high ground and real social benefits of “altruistic” virtue-signaling do not need to have any basis in reality, or even actually help people. And when they are institutionally enshrined, even better! Returning to Barbara A. Oakley:

The government-sponsored enterprises Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae allowed less-than-qualified individuals to receive housing loans and encouraged more-qualified borrowers to overextend themselves. Typical risk–reward considerations were marginalized because of implicit government support. The government used these agencies to promote social goals without acknowledging the risk or cost. When economic conditions faltered, many lost their homes or found themselves with properties worth far less than they originally had paid. Government policy then shifted the cost of this “altruism” to the public, to pay off the too-big-to-fail banks then holding securitized subprime loans.[4]

Western elites and their clueless Goodwhite allies (colloquially known as “shitlibs”) are impervious to the mounting social, financial, and human cost in their endless pursuit of the brass ring of moral superiority. For some, it is purely self-serving, either through the acquisition of power and social capital, or because of the potent “helper’s high” that comes from giving and the perception of having “done good.” Others guiltily shrink away from confronting the harsh realities of existence while yet another camp toasts the cheap labor and cheap commercial products, drunk on the apathy of affluence—finally, still others’ eyes shine with malevolence, possessed as they are with raw hatred of the Western world and a desire to see it first reduced to ashes and then swept away forever. These groups are variegated in their present positioning, but all stand to gain from, depending on the group in question, our subjugation, demise, or erasure.

To be fair, there are many people out there who do good simply because it aligns with their moral code and because it is just the right thing to do, or at least appears to be, and not all who do good are pathological, but there can be no question that: 1) as a society, as a culture, and as a civilization (what’s left of it), we are thoroughly pathologized, and 2) there are many self-interested “defectors” who, though not morally, are rationally reaping enormous benefit from the absence of a “guardian system.” We venerate the barbarian Other at our own expense and worship the Great Flattening of our dynamic and exceptional civilization and call it “virtue.” It is worth asking, in the end, who really benefits.

From https://theanatomicallycorrectbanana.com/home/2018/7/18/enlightened-free-loaders-and-the-pathological-altruists-who-love-them

 

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3690610/

[2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-exhaustion-of-american-liberalism-1488751826

[3] http://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/360083-systemic-racism-is-so-rare-in-america-the-media-just-cant-stop-lying

[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3690610/

The Robotic Burgers are Coming

They all got to go home!!

Adrian Sol
Daily Stormer
July 15, 2018

Activate technological unemployment.

This is just one more reason to let in infinity beaners. After all, who’s going to do the maintenance on all these robots? White people?

I think not.

White people aren’t interested in doing things like that. We need immigrants to come here and do the jobs we won’t do, such as engineering complex automated systems to reduce labor costs.

The lesson: HODL!!!111 It’s not like you’re going to have a job to go back to anyway.

The Verge:

Arriving at Creator, a new restaurant located on the ground floor of an office building on downtown San Francisco’s Folsom Street, feels like walking into a catalog. Sleek, wooden communal tables with high white stools line one end of the room, with a bookshelf full of hand-picked culinary books against the wall and modern light fixtures overhead. On the other end, however, two large machines each the size of a small car form a 90-degree angle around a center counter, giving the whole space a retro-futurist aesthetic. It’s what you would have imagined a restaurant eventually looking like if you watched a lot of The Jetsons.

It took a damn long time, but that Jetsons future appears to be on its way. Except for the whole trannies and niggers thing.

At least we’ll have robots to fend off the pervert/colored hordes.

Those machines, with large transparent glass casings and ingredients in cylindrical tubes, are Creator’s burger-making robots. Each 14-foot device contains around 350 sensors and 20 microcomputers to produce the best, freshest, locally sourced cheeseburger that $6 can get you in America’s most expensive city.

IDZ HABBENING!!!!

Dog bless Ameriga.

After trying the first one out of the machine that day, I can confidently say the claim holds up; it’s the best-tasting burger for the money I’ve ever had. The machine is also capable of making multiple kinds of burgers, with vastly different flavor, ingredient, and condiment combinations. In a way, it feels like the future of fast casual food.

“We wanted to design a device that meets nature where it is, and not make food conform to a robot,” CEO Alex Vardakostas tells The Verge in an interview. “We didn’t want something that would make one kind of burger. We look at this like a platform for recipes, and we wanted as much culinary creativity as possible.” Right now, Creator is only taking reservations for 30-minute lunchtime slots on Wednesdays and Thursdays through the month of July, and plans to do the same in August while it irons out kinks and improves its software and workflow. But, eventually, Vardakostas says you’ll be able to order takeout using the company’s mobile app, while workers with iPhones will stroll around the restaurant to take eat-in orders, just like an Apple Store.

Right. The technology already exists to make all the food automatically and allow people to order using their own phones, or touch-screen terminals in the store.

Ultimately, this means that restaurants could be run with one or two employees, instead of eight or more on the floor simultaneously. This also means that the few employees required will have greater responsibilities, and will be paid more – which is to say, they won’t be Shaniquas.

BYE BYE NIGGERS!

Operating a cash register is already straining the average Black’s abilities to the breaking point. Keeping machinery functional is obviously way beyond what they could ever manage.

Case in point, pretty much every time I’ve been to a McDonald’s location with self-service terminals, half of them were not functional, and the nogs who worked there didn’t even bother putting up “out of service” signs, let alone fix whatever mundane problem the machines were having.

Creator, formerly known as Momentum Machines, is one of a rising new type of automated restaurant, mixing the best of the tech industry’s software, robotics, and artificial intelligence skills with top-tier culinary expertise. The goal is not to automate away humans entirely, but to automate the portion of the restaurant experience that can be done better, faster, and be more cost efficient with machines. Creator joins companies like San Francisco-based quinoa bowl chain Eatsa, pizza-delivery company Zume in Mountain View, CaliBurger parent company and Miso Robotics investor Cali Group, and a smattering of up-and-coming locations around the country like Boston’s Spyce and Seattle’s Junkichi.

These robotic restaurants are spreading fast, as the technology gets cheaper. Moreover, various types of self-service counters are being implemented in existing franchises, cutting down on labor requirements.

These companies always claim that the goal isn’t to replace employees with machines. That’s obviously bullshit; this situation where they have just as many employees as before is just a temporary phase, as they work out the kinks in the system. Very quickly, the number of employees will be cut down to the minimum.

This isn’t a problem for White people per se. An average 100 IQ White guy can easily learn how to operate and repair all the machines in a restaurant. Thus automation will simply create more high-wage jobs for technicians in various fields.

But our underclass of useless brown people is about to get a whole lot bigger.

Trump to Congress: “You Can Take These Spics and Shove Them”

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
June 16, 2018

One of my favorite quotes from the famous scientist and anti-gook activist ((((((Albert Einstein)))))) is “you can take this job and shove it,” which he told the Israeli government when they offered him a position as president of their country.

I’ve always had a fun time using different versions of that Einstein quote, and like when I was thinking about Trump and this immigration thing, I thought of it and came up with a new version.

I think it’s a really hilarious joke.

CNN:

House Republicans were in full-on damage control Friday morning as they sought to downplay President Donald Trump’s comments that he wouldn’t support the GOP compromise bill.

After a day of confusion that threatened the future of the legislation, the White House issued a statement on the record that Trump supported the bill along with a more conservative piece of legislation.

“The President fully supports both the Goodlatte bill and the House leadership bill. In this morning’s interview, he was commenting on the discharge petition in the House, and not the new package. He would sign either the Goodlatte or the leadership bills,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement.

“Oh I’ll support your bill alright… I’ll support your bill right in the face!”

After toiling away for weeks on a hard-fought compromise bill that tackled border security and even delivered Trump his campaign promise of a border wall, Republican aides and members involved in the discussions were taken aback by the President’s impromptu interview with Fox News on the White House lawn where Trump insinuated he wouldn’t support a bill that had been negotiated with his administration’s involvement. Many members were desperate to believe that the President had either been referring to another bill or would reverse course later in the day — while conservatives cheered the President as rightfully demanding changes to the bill.

One White House official who was watching the interview in a room with others said there were audible gasps when the President made the comment as staff immediately realized the potential consequences of the President’s remarks.
On Friday afternoon, Trump tweeted, but it did little to settle the question of where he officially stood on the compromise legislation.

Yeah lol

Dems r real family breaker-uppers, kek.

He’s saying the same exact thing he’s always said (except when he was randomly saying different things as fakeouts): he’ll do DACA if he gets absolutely every single other thing he’s asking for on immigration.

That means wall, border shutdown, end of a bunch of different kinds of visas, end of the refugee program, etc. etc. etc.

So he was like “sure, I’ll support the bill, just get the bill done” and then when it’s close to done he’s like “sure, no problem, now just put in all that other stuff I said I wanted and we’ll be good to go.”

Before the on-the-record statement, the White House official told CNN on Friday after the tweet that Trump did indeed support the House compromise immigration bill, despite saying otherwise in the morning. The same person admitted that Trump’s tweet had done little to clarify his position.

CNN has started faking insider sources at the same rate as NYT and WaPo. These “source said” statements just do not have any value at all anymore when coming from any of the big mainstream media organizations.

The official also said that congressional leadership had reached out to the White House to express their unhappiness with the President’s comments.

The lack of clarity led GOP leaders to put their plans for the bill on hold.

One GOP whip aide told CNN, “It’s pretty basic. We aren’t going to whip anything unless it has Trump’s support. That’s why we need more clarity.”

Republicans even trying to rush through immigration reform before the midterms indicates that they are actually trying to lose the elections.

The media keeps talking about how there are these “moderate districts” which want all of these Mexicans. But even Democrats are fed up with immigration. The only people who want all of these infinity brown people are:

  1. Jews
  2. Corporations that want to keep down the value of labor
  3. Other brown people (except blacks, every group wants to bring in more of their own people as our country gets stripped like vultures stripping a corpse), and
  4. Extreme leftists ideological lunatics (mostly single and/or childless women)

Everyone else in the country has had enough of this sludge flood.

Even if they are afraid to admit it publicly, because of the social stigma the Jews have created through manipulation of the media, academia, etc., they are thinking this and this is what is determining the way people vote.

Fake polls aside.

Everyone knows this.

But a lot of these people don’t even want to be reelected. They have these campaign contributors (who bribe them, legally) that they are indebted to, and Trump is making it impossible for them to pay that debt.

You see them resigning. A bunch of these cucks are resigning. Because they just can’t do the job that they were paid to do by their donors. So they’re dipping out.

So this entire thing of doing immigration right before the midterms is self-sabotage, and Trump gets it, he’s not going to let it happen.

Did Anthony Bourdain Kill Himself Because Of His Blue Pill Views On Women? Yes, But that’s Only Part of The Why.

Updated 7/13/18

By Max Roscoe

Chef and CNN Travel correspondent Anthony Bordain hung himself in his Paris hotel on June 8, 2018.  No suicide note was referenced in early reports.

My immediate reaction to hearing this news was recollecting a ROK article on Bourdain’s last wife publicly cucking himFour months later, they separated.

The Dangers of Not Taking The Red Pill

I have minimal exposure to pozzed media, and did not follow Bourdain.  I know he was passionate about food and travel, two of my interests.  He created a TV series for the Travel Channel and CNN exposing viewers to exotic foods from all over the world, shunning tourist traps and mainstream hotels in search of an authentic experience.

He was wildly successful, wealthy, and famous.  And yet he was unhappy enough to take his own life.  We may never know precisely the reasons, but I predict his suicide stems from unhappiness in his personal life.

First Marriage to a High School Girlfriend

Objectively the most feminine of his partners

Bordain married his high school girlfriend, Nancy Putkoski, and they stayed in a childless marriage for two decades before divorcing in 2005.  If I had married so young, I shudder to think of the horrible decisions I would have made, without learning the reality of women the hard way.  Some state they separated because Bourdain was not home often, working long hours first in the kitchen, and later producing his television programs around the world.

Second Marriage to Martial Arts Fighter

In 2007 Bourdain married MMA Fighter Ottavia Busia, having a daughter the same year.  This relationship was covered in two ROK articles here and here.  Busia was visibly uncommitted to her husband, as seen in numerous photographs and social media postings.  Her body language, turning away from her man, bringing the attention to herself, and posing in provocative images with other men were all warning signs, and the couple divorced in 2016, four months after the initial ROK article.

Relationship With Radical Feminist Asia Argento

Just Lovely, I’m Sure

Bordain next became involved with the train wreck known as Asia Argento, an Italian actress and feminist.  In late 2017, Argento claimed that ((((((((((((Harvey Weinstein)))))))))))) raped her in the 1990s, after which she had multiple sexual relations with him over many years.

Apologize for having oral sex with a sober adult woman who came on to you, now! You evil white male!

Argento’s Twitter feed is full of anti-slut shaming, feminism, profanity, globohomo promotion, and aggressive masculine imagery.  Last week she was spotted publicly humiliating her boyfriend Bourdain.

Toxic Feminism

The media loves to play with the invented idea of “toxic masculinity,” the idea that being masculine is so evil and destructive that it can cause toxic “death or serious debilitation.”

But how often do we see masculinity leading to death?  On the other hand, radical feminism has caused countless prominent, powerful, and wealthy men, from Robin Williams, to Freddie Prinze to likely Bordain, to end their lives.

Asia with another man just days before Bourdain’s suicide

Bourdain believed in the blue pilled myth of the gentle, sweet, kind and loyal woman.  After being publicly cucked and humiliated by his last 2 partners, did this drive him to suicide?

Bordain’s Plan For His Daughter

My sole duty as a parent and as a father, particularly raising a little girl who is going to grow up to be a young woman, is that she will never look to men for affirmation, or anyone else for affirmation
or self-worth or be physically intimidated by anyone. My daughter spinning arm bars is a thing of envy — Ronda Rousey quality

Sadly, Bordain fell for the feminist line that we should encourage women to live free and wild lives without limits.  His goal of raising his child to never by physically intimidated by anyone would be unrealistic if he were raising a son, but it’s downright absurd for a daughter.

And a woman who never looks to a man for affirmation is a woman who will be physically and emotionally alone, cold, unloved, and unlikely to listen to her natural feminine nurturing instincts.

Was This What Bourdain Had In Mind?

Ronda Rousey is not the role model for what a woman should be — particularly not a father’s goal for his daughter.  While Ronda may be the one in a million who found success in an unlikely career, why would a father yearn for a violent, aggressive, and masculine daughter?

Lessons From The Tragedy

First, we should realize that Bourdain was acting out of love and true desire for the happiness of his daughter when he made his misguided decisions.  In the modern world, we are bombarded with societal truths, such as…

  • Democracy is great,
  • Feminism makes women happy,
  • Gay marriage is beautiful and good,
  • We should invade the Middle East and install liberal democracies,
  • They Hate Us For Our Freedoms,
  • Men and women are paid different wages
  • Israel is our greatest ally,
  • Militias are dangerous and evil,
  • Hate speech should be outlawed,
  • Big is beautiful
  • Women And Men Are Equal
  • Changing one’s sex is a choice all children must consider
  • Lack of Affirmative Verbal Consent = Rape
  • Sex with alcohol = Rape
  • Syria used chemical weapons
  • Men meeting up to socialize = Rape Clubs

It is difficult and time consuming to research and test these hypotheses to see if they are true.  And besides, when seemingly all of one’s friends and neighbors are repeating the above mantras, surely doubting them is as wrong as considering whether the earth is really flat, right?  It’s much easier to let the media reveal the truth to us.  After all, that is their job!

A Misguided Loving Father

I don’t fault Bourdain, a busy man who married young, spent little time at home, and never learned the red pill.  Our society teaches many lies, and I believed most of them for a long time.  His wishes for his daughter come from a desire that she is happy and fulfilled.  But sadly, masculinity and unrestrained freedom do not bring women happiness.

Asia Argento tweet about university feminists mobilizing against “harassment and abuse”

We are seeing huge experiments with civilization, and so far they seem to be failing.  While it is easy to be trapped in the bubble of feminism, and believe that the world has been wrong for the entirety of history, and we are just now setting it right, if one stops to think logically, that doesn’t make any sense.

Men Can Always Start Over

I have never understood suicide.  While I have experienced depression before, I have always thought if things really got so bad that I felt like ending my life, I would just disappear overnight to a third world country and start over.  Take $5,000, and head near the equator, and forget all the stresses and personal commitments of the modern world.  I’m beginning to think it’s something I should do before depression sets in.  But regardless, men should know that suicide is never the answer.

I have seen successful, happy, alpha men fall apart, cry, and even break down in a seizure, over the intense stress and pain a woman caused them.  Lack of a good relationship is far preferable to a miserable one.  If you are experiencing severe depression, you can get out.  The US National Suicide Prevention Phone # is 1-800-273-8255.

On another note:

Of Sepulchres and Suicides

 

Until yesterday, this was one of those essays that looked to be permanently placed in draft-limbo. This is a fate shared by quite a few essays that I have ideas for, but cannot quite figure out how to finish or what angle to take. Despite the fact that I found the subject-matter in this essay very interesting, there simply was no angle that encapsulated what I wanted to communicate. That is, until I heard of the death by suicide of ((((((((((((Anthony Bourdain)))))))))))).

I’ve shared a little bit about my youthful culinary interests on twitter, what I didn’t share is that they were largely inspired by Mr. Bourdain’s book “Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly“, to this day one of my favorite books within the genre. The book describes the journey of a young man from chucking clams in Rhode Island to the Rainbow room in Manhattan, drug use, alcohol abuse, and high gastronomy, but more than anything it was about passion. As the years passed by, my interests shifted a little, but I tried to keep up with Anthony’s work whether on the travel channel, the food network or other places. For someone who still has a passion for food, and all that surrounds it, he was the culinary ((((((((((((Christopher Hitchens)))))))))))), an irreverent, ghost-pepper in an increasingly bland world of cuisine. However, as his career progressed, it was difficult not to notice the gradual softening of his, the cursing became more rare, as did the drinking, he quit smoking and he had children.

I stopped watching TV some time ago, so it was a few years until he popped up on my radar again, this time coming across my twitter feed in a retweet after my return to the manosphere. Out of curiosity I looked him up, found that he’d gotten divorced sometime earlier and was dating an MMA star. I clicked the tweet and I noticed the unmistakable Beta tells in the pictures, the fact that his girlfriend’s instagram was filled with pictures of her with other men that were 30 years his junior, and I thought to myself “That’s going to blow up in his face, maybe we’ll get the old hard drinking, angry, ((((((((((((Anthony Bourdain)))))))))))) back. The man who banned ((((((((((((Billy Joel)))))))))))) from every restaurant kitchen he ever ran“.

Alas, yesterday I saw the news coming across my twitter feed, he was found dead in his hotel, having ended his life in a case that appears related to “girl problems”. I was going to let this go, but then the inevitably “toxic masculinity” arguments came flowing out into the media “oh if only men were more like women, they wouldn’t kill themselves” and I figured, ah that is a perfect frame for that essay in my draft folder.

The big, often glossed over thing about suicide is that women attempt to kill themselves just as much or even more than men, they are just less successful at it [1]. They attempt to kill themselves so that someone will come to them and be like “Oh honey, are you OK, want to talk about it?“. Men are much better and more successful at killing themselves, because they do it because they are done talking. For women a suicide attempt is a comma in the sentence of their life, for men it’s the exclamation point at the end of it. If men were less “masculine” and more like women, we would simply see a drop in successful suicides, with an increase in suicide attempts.

Of Idealism, Meaning and Hope

Meaning has in many ways been the persuasion of the manosphere over the past year or so, however in many ways I view it as a digression rather than an explanatory variable. Some common red pill axioms is that men love idealistically, women love opportunistically, often framed as “men are the true romantics” along with the observation that a woman can never love a man the way he wants to be loved. These axioms are the antithesis to the thesis of the blue pill, that women love idealistically and are the true romantics, and once you find “the one” she will love you the way you want to be loved. This is the carrot of the blue pill illusion, that instills in a young man the hope, that once he finds his one, he will find meaning in all the suffering that preceded finding her.

This gives rise to tautologies such as “she wasn’t the one” and “the right one is out there for you“, That serve the purpose of kindling the flicker of hope within a man who has just taken a blow to his religion. Much like comet cult leaders who have just had their predictions of the end of the world objectively proven wrong, one has to re-frame the situation in order to maintain the shared delusion of the cult, “Oh the aliens just did one bang-up job of cleaning away all the advanced tech they used to build the pyramids“, “Oh the aliens that were coming to get us got delayed by a DUI checkpoint just outside the solar system and will be here in a couple of weeks when Zanu’s brother-in-law can come get the ship“, “Oh, she only fucked all your friends because she wasn’t the one“.

In many ways there are two cults within the world, the one of hyper-agency and the one of hypo-agency. In the former you are the omnipotent Zeus merely playing with the morals, in the latter you are merely the mortal being played with by the omnipotent Zeus. The reductio ad absurdum of the former is that everything your woman does, ultimately is a reaction to your action, to put it briefly “You were not alpha enough”. The same analysis of the latter, would be “There is no such thing as alpha enough”.

Therefore one could construct the following positions.

A) When you find the one, she will always view you as the ultimate alpha. Any change in her perception of you is caused by you utilizing your agency poorly.

B) There is no one, a woman’s view of you as alpha is always conditional. Any change in her perception of you is caused by a change you have no control over.

C) There are many someones, a woman’s view of you is always dynamic. Any change in her perception of you can be caused a change in you, a change in her, a change in context or in all of the above.

Number three is the position whereby one accepts one’s own agency, yet has a sensible view of it, one is neither omnipotent or impotent. Number two is the one where one refuses to accept one’s own hand in the demise, in effect viewing oneself as impotent. Number one is the position of hyper-agency, where one views oneself as omnipotent.

If you internalize the message many men are raised with, that you are always responsible not only for yourself, but for your tribe, and over things which you do not control, then everything is always your fault. Accepting that “everything is your fault” can be a good thing if you are the type of person who has an external locus of control, and always blame outside forces for your own misfortune. If you’re 50 years old and still blame your parents for things, you have to come to grips with the fact that they raised you for 18 years, you’ve had 32 years where you didn’t do shit.

However, if you are a “Good Boy“, conscientious, dutiful, dedicated, loyal, high in agreeableness, and who takes on responsibility for everything this leads down a dangerous path. If you internalize execution but externalize direction, then you blame yourself for not being able to follow a map of Canada to Las Vegas. This is the core problem of the blue pill illusion, it provides men with maps, 487 bullet point lists, logos for why the map is correct, pathos to ingrain the map in his emotional function and ethos by having it communicated to him when he is young by figures of authority. However, it places the responsibility for following the map on each individual man.

Like men do, they all attempt to follow the map to Shangri-la by whatever means they had, in many ways one cannot fault them for effort, the trouble is that the outcome didn’t follow from the input. They did everything right, and everything turned out wrong. However, this fault lies not with the individual man, but with the map they were provided.

This is where I come back to the ((((((((((((Karl Marx)))))))))))) quote that I’ve share previously on this blog:

“The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.” ((((((((((((Karl Marx))))))))))))

What I like about this quote, is that despite my criticisms of ((((((((((((Marx))))))))))))’s economic theory as being “a great system if human nature did not exist“, I think ((((((((((((Marx)))))))))))) had a fundamentally sound understanding of human beings. If one is living in abject misery, and religion provides a justification for the misery, and imbues it with purpose, then that helps blunt the pain of the present situation through the belief in a better future. After all, what is 65 years of misery when compared to an eternity in paradise?

Meaning is the antithesis of existential nihilism, but hope is the antithesis of despair.

Summary and Conclusions

One of my regular arguments in the many discussions we’ve had on The Red Man Group when it comes to mass shooters, is that the mass shooter phenomena and the male suicide phenomena are merely two sides of the same coin, acting out vs. acting in, those who turn the gun on others, and those who turn the gun on themselves. We can discuss the “why” until we are all bored to tears, but truthfully I don’t think it has to do with meaning. In many ways I think meaning is a red herring, and the true problem is hope. These men all seemed to have an idea of what would give their life meaning, purpose and value, namely being able to fulfill the blue pill illusion. The very same illusion they had been told from childhood would give their life meaning, and to which they had been provided a map.

The men, whether they elect to act out or act in, are doing so after staring into the abyss so long that they have become trapped within it, perhaps a flicker of light may be present that can guide them out of the darkness. This flicker of light is hope and idealism. Just as ((((((((((((Marx)))))))))))) said, religion gives man a reason to continue despite present misery, based on the hope of a better future. In our long history of inflicting brutality, gruesomeness, torture and evil on our fellow man, one can often see one major difference between those who persevere and those who perish. Those who perish are either stuck in the past and incapable of adapting to their present environment or stuck in the present unable to utilize the future as a motivating factor to keep walking through hell to reach the other side. Those who persevere are adaptable enough to function within their present, but not so mired in it that they cannot see that guiding light of future promise. Once that light dies, the journey comes to its conclusion.

The common denominator in both acting out and acting in, is that these men lost hope for a better future, they projected their present state forward, for the remainder of their life, and made a decision that such a future was not worth living. They had attempted to find the meaning that they so sought following the exact map they had been provided. They often struggled for decades, slogging along on a path beset on all sides by evildoers, a path covered in thorns, vines and vicious vermin, yet they persevered, and every time they thought they had reached the promised paradise, it was shown to be nothing but a mirage.

The major distinction between the Red Pill and The Blue Pill Illusion begins with the first principle. The blue pill states there is a one, build yourself into a man of value for her. The red pill states, there is no one, build yourself into a man of value. Those of you who have read my essays for some time now, will perhaps have identified my cardinal principle from “Of Means and Ends”. In the blue pill frame, building yourself into a man of value is a means to an end, it is something you do for someone else. The definition of value in this context is whatever the 487 bullet point list says that it is. In the red pill frame, building yourself into a man of value is an end in itself, it means as the Heartiste maxim states “III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority” [2]

This is why introspection matters, it is very easy to take direction from others, and just execute what they told you. However, in doing so you give up the directive power over your own life to someone else. You make yourself into an employee in your own life, never asking what you think is best, but relying on others to tell you. When you then come to realize that their orders, plans and ideas were wrong, you find yourself having potentially spent your whole life, running from mirage to mirage, hoping to find water, but finding only sand. If a man has found sand countless times, he may become convinced that water does not exist, if water is his reason for existing, and he is convinced that water does not exist, what reason does he have to exist?

This is why one cannot make one’s raison d’être something that can be taken away, the external trappings that come with progress in one’s mission are nice, but they can be taken away or lost, the character traits and personality you build cannot.

[1] https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/

[2] https://heartiste.wordpress.com/the-sixteen-commandments-of-poon/

South Africa Nearing the Point of No Return

Gregory Hood, American Renaissance, 20 February 2018

For those ostensibly interested in building a multiracial democracy, the recent history of Zimbabwe should be a warning, not a model. However, South Africa appears poised to follow its northern neighbor’s disastrous policies of land confiscation and white scapegoating, accelerating the former First World nation’s decline. International observers are cheered by the departure of the “Rainbow Nation’s” famously corrupt president Jacob Zuma, but the new South African President, Cyril Ramaphosa, faces the all but impossible task of repairing the country’s crumbling economy while appeasing a black electorate that wants to seize white farmland.

President Ramaphosa, leader of South Africa’s dominant African National Congress (ANC), is taking office with sky-high expectations from both South Africans and the international community. However, there has been so much economic damage from Mr. Zuma’s administration that both S&P Global and Fitch have downgraded South Africa’s long term debt to “junk,” and Moody’s has put the country on review. If Moody’s follows S&P and Fitch, South Africa’s government will have to spend more on debt payments, and investment capital would flee the country, making it even more difficult to fund social programs. South Africa’s finance minister (who is seen as a Zuma loyalist and whose job is in doubt) says repairing South Africa’s credit rating will be a top priority for the new government.

The markets are responding positively to Mr. Ramaphosa’s inauguration; the rand increased in value and stocks soared after Mr. Zuma was forced out. Optimistic press reports claim South Africa is ready to “explode” economically. Also, racial tensions are said to be exaggerated, since Mr. Zuma failed in his attempt to cling to power by blaming white people. South Africa’s legal process functioned as it should, and Mr. Zuma was forced out peacefully, despite fears he was going to use militant tactics to stay in power. Since Mr. Ramaphosa’s main priorities are economic, he hardly sounds like a radical.

JOHANNESBURG, March 14, 2017 South Africa’s Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa addresses the Global Entrepreneurship Congress (GEC) 2017 at Sandton Convention Center, Johannesburg,?South?Africa, on March 14, 2017.?The Global Entrepreneurship Congress (GEC) 2017 opened on Tuesday in Johannesburg by South Africa’s Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa with the aim of sharing ideas on how small businesses can grow and make positive contributions to their countries. (Credit Image: © Xinhua via ZUMA Wire)

Nevertheless, Mr. Ramaphosa’s margin for maneuver is far narrower than enthusiastic coverage would suggest. While trying to calm international markets, he has also called for confronting “inequality,” a question that in South Africa carries major racial overtones. He will find it hard to do both.

First, more than anything else, Mr. Ramaphosa has to tackle the problems of corruption and mismanagement in state-owned companies, problems that got worse under Mr. Zuma. Mr. Zuma built his power on a network of patronage and political obligations, and rooting out his loyalists will take time. It is also likely to be divisive for the already fragmented ANC, since Mr. Zuma still has supporters, especially in his stronghold of KwaZulu-Natal. Mr. Zuma is reported to have had corrupt partnerships with the Guptas—an Indian immigrant family with a huge holdings in South Africa’s resources—and his upcoming trial will only heighten tensions within the ANC.

The very trait that makes Mr. Ramaphosa attractive to foreign investors—his perceived friendliness to the free market—also opens up a line of attack for his opponents inside and outside the ANC. Mr. Ramaphosa is, by South African standards, soft on the question of race and redistribution of wealth. The main division is around the term “white monopoly capital.” Mr. Zuma and his allies wanted the term, with its explicit racial identification, designated in party propaganda as an enemy to be fought. Mr. Ramaphosa argued that the term, which once formed part of the ANC’s revolutionary lexicon, should be left in the past. Others still use such language. For example, Jacob Zuma’s son Edward, even while calling for party unity behind Mr. Ramaphosa, declared his father’s fall a victory for “white monopoly capital and the Western agents who are hell-bent on destroying our country.”

Julius Malema of the leftist Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party has vowed to give Mr. Ramaphosa even more trouble than he gave Mr. Zuma. He recirculated reports of Mr. Ramaphosa’s involvement in a massacre of striking mine workers in 2012 and reportedly said that he “wanted to show white capitalists that Ramaphosa will not save them.” Since Mr. Malema is already blasting Mr. Ramaphosa for having “no plan,” the new president will be under pressure to act quickly. While the EFF has a small political following compared to that of the ANC, the fact Mr. Malema is a former head of the ANC Youth League shows the potential for the ANC to splinter on questions of economic redistribution and race.

Mr. Malema is already finding something to cheer about, since Mr. Ramaphosa has declared his support for a program of taking land without compensation. This would seem to conflict with his promise to increase economic growth and attract foreign investment. Foreign capital shies away from countries where it can be seized without recompense, but Mr. Ramaphosa probably felt he had to offer the Left something. However, he suggests farmland should be taken only in a way that “increases agricultural production, improves food security.”

It is not clear how this can be done.

The agricultural association Agri SA has warned that any attempt to change the constitution to legalize taking land without compensation would be economic suicide. Some analysts suggest such a plan wouldn’t even do much to reduce economic inequality but would simply harm investment and food security. Even ministers from Zimbabwe are telling South Africa that following the Robert Mugabe model is a bad idea.

Mr. Ramaphosa seems to be trying to have it both ways. He has recommended in the past that people remain calm about the land issue. In January, he acknowledged that it was a “delicate” problem, distancing himself from the Mr. Malema’s EFF and the radicals. Yet telling white farmers their land could be taken and that without them South Africa could be a “garden of Eden” is hardly conducive to calm. The Boer Afrikaner Volksraad, an Afrikaner activist group, said any land seizure would be a “declaration of war” and promised retaliation. Since Mr. Malema told his followers last year to simply “take” land they like, there is a strong possibility of either a violent confrontation or a political debacle.

If confidence in Mr. Ramaphosa is shattered, that could be the final blow to South Africa’s rickety credit ratings. Even if Mr. Ramaphosa succeeds in one aspect of his economic program, that may increase pressure for him to confiscate land. One of South Africa’s most important industries is mining, where there are especially high expectations for Mr. Ramaphosa. However, as mining operations expand, they may spill over onto arable land, which edges out tribal communities and could increase demands for redistribution of white farms.

What’s more, it’s questionable whether any redistribution program can be efficiently administered until corruption is rooted out, since redistribution would probably spawn new forms of fraud and bribery. Given the confusion about who actually owns a great deal of South Africa’s farmland, even the most careful tallies would be marred with inaccuracies and arbitrary judgments.

White South Africans are facing more immediate threats than the legal ones coming from the new head of state. After the ANC takeover, the South African government implemented strict gun control and outlawed the “commandos,” or Afrikaner self-defense groups, making it far harder for farmers to protect themselves. Not surprisingly, the murder rate for Boer farmers is famously high. On October 30, 2017, white South Africans hosted nationwide #BlackMonday protests, which Afrikaner advocate Dan Roodt credits with creating a “sense of community and solidarity” among whites, who now realize the ANC government will not protect them. Organizations such as the Suidlanders claim they will be able to safeguard the white population in the event of a crisis, but there is already a constant low-level crisis. Just last Friday, there was yet another farm murder, with a 73-year-old man killed after three gun-toting men broke into his house.

The violence against white South African farmers is already on the brink of mainstream attention. Well-known British columnist Katie Hopkins created a media hubub after being banned from South Africa earlier this month for “racist views”—that is, for pointing out the frequency of farm murders—and Lauren Southern’s firsthand reporting on violence against white South Africans is already in post-production as a documentary entitled “Farmlands.” Last summer, Ann Coulter said “White South African farmers facing genocide” were “the only real refugees.”

There’s another major crisis looming for Mr. Ramaphosa. Cape Town is on the verge of running out of water. “Day Zero,” the day when the municipal water supply will be cut off, has been set for June 4. Cape Town has dramatically increased in population over the last two decades, adding more strain on an already buckling infrastructure. Like the rest of South Africa, Cape Town faces huge divisions between its white and black population. Although there has been so much advance warning that serious civil disorder seems unlikely, the spectacle of one of the country’s greatest cities running out of water will hardly inspire investor confidence.

The situation of white South Africans is nearing a turning point. Lawless violence and “lawful” confiscation could end Afrikaner farming. Whites are being increasingly scapegoated for the country’s problems by the likes of Mr. Malema’s EFF and the left wing of the ANC. And while Mr. Ramaphosa may symbolize a return to sanity, his call for land confiscation suggests he fears losing the left wing of his party. Even if he does not follow through with confiscation, raising the hopes of black leftists could have dangerous consequences for white South Africans, who are now essentially hostages in their own country.

However, apocalypse is probably not around the corner. Some of the more excitable conservative and white advocacy websites have long warned of impending “white genocide,” but the handover of power to the ANC did not trigger mass extermination. There was no Haitian-style orgy of bloodletting after the death of Nelson Mandela. Though the ANC continues to sing violent songs such as “Bring Me My Machine Gun,” President Ramaphosa is trying to strike a conciliatory tone and even suggests land confiscation will be done in an orderly way after a process of study, not through Mr. Malema’s preferred tactic of arbitrarily claiming land. The main priority of the South African government is appeasing the international financial system, not slaughtering white farmers.

If Mr. Ramaphosa succeeds, it would make South Africa’s political situation more repressive. South Africa’s ANC seems to have found a model to emulate in China’s political system, which unites the interest of the ruling party with that of the state. The rightist Democratic Alliance and the forthrightly leftist Economic Freedom Fighters EFF gained ground at the expense of the ANC as South Africans revolted against Jacob Zuma’s corruption. Now that Mr. Zuma is gone, there is a possibility the ANC will be able to reestablish its all-but-all-powerful place in South African politics. If Mr. Ramaphosa can give the ANC political hegemony, South Africa could gradually become a de jure, rather than a de facto, one party state. Whites would have even less power under such a system than they have now.

For now, the most likely outcome is that Mr. Ramaphosa will to try to please “white monopoly capital” abroad while appealing to leftists at home through land confiscation, ultimately satisfying no one. Black crime and violence will rise, and public trust will diminish. Whites are already in danger, with each house operating as a kind of fortress. Private security services are practically a necessity.

As long as the violence proceeds at a level low enough not to draw mainstream media attention, there will be no real political pressure to change. Ultimately, South African whites pose little political threat to the South African elite. The government will be indifferent to their welfare, provided they are not killed suddenly enough to cause a media outcry. Whites will simply be whittled down. Eventually, to speak of a Boer “people” will be as fanciful as speaking of a Rhodesian “people.”

The solution is for white South Africans to break away from the ANC-controlled system. A number of white leaders during the final months of apartheid did commit to seceding from South Africa and creating a “Boer Volkstaat.” However, one of the most influential right-wing leaders, General Constand Viljoen, betrayed the movement at the last minute, instead suggesting participation in “democratic elections”—a strange strategy when facing an overwhelming black majority. Gerneral Viljoen supposedly extracted a promise from the new government to “consider” a Volkstaat, but, predictably enough, none was ever really considered. He dedicated himself to creating an Afrikaner political party, “Freedom Front Plus,” which generally wins less than 1 percent of the vote. Boers cannot vote their way out of this problem.

But votes do count for something, and there is one place where the Freedom Front Plus wins landslides: the thriving Boer community of Orania. And Orania’s leadership believes now is the time to start pushing for a homeland, arguing that conditions are more favorable than ever. Julius Malema has made a cordial visit to the town, and, incredibly, the EFF won four votes there.

Yet, there is great antipathy towards Orania, and the South African government is unlikely to let the Boers go their own way. South Africa’s powerful trade unions are urging the government to crush Orania and its plans to introduce a new e-currency. It is so obvious that a Boer Volkstaat would be a success that even a National Review columnist has called for a white South African city-state. But that’s precisely why the ANC can’t let the Afrikaners go. Losing their resources and tax revenue would be a heavy blow to South Africa’s struggling economy.

There will be no easy road to Afrikaner freedom. This great people must be ready either to seize a sudden opportunity in the midst of violence or continue cautiously to build a community as the country grows more desperate and divided.

White advocates around the world ought to be deeply concerned with the fate of the Afrikaners, even aside from humanitarian reasons. South Africa shows the future for white people in a majority non-white world. Whites are rendered collectively powerless, politically oppressed, and somehow still labeled as privileged. And while the government provides some minimum level of protection of property to keep the economy going, leftist political parities representing the non-white masses are constantly urging—and gradually getting—an ever larger share of white property.

The Boers can’t fight this battle alone. The status quo is untenable and dangerous, and the only likely alternatives are worse. White advocates must denounce the constant violence against the Boers, ensure no action is taken against Orania, and lobby for white South Africans to be treated as refugees if they flee their homeland. Most importantly, white South Africans need support from our people’s larger diaspora, whether the attack continues against them at its current pace or whether it accelerates as Mr. Ramaphosa moves to seize their land.

White South Africans have inhabited their country as long as white Americans have inhabited ours. In the long run, their fate will be our fate. Mr. Ramaphosa must learn there is a line not to be crossed. Land confiscation is that line. If he decides to fight the Boers, whites around the world must send him a message: He’s fighting us all.

Opioids and the Crisis of the White Working Class and Those Who Are Responsible

Opioids and the Crisis of the White Working Class

By Kevin MacDonald

 

A sense of betrayal seems to lie just behind today’s political discourse—a feeling of being left behind, a suspicion that those at the top, in media, corporations, politics, academia, and finance, have motives and goals at odds with those of the broader population. Put simply, Americans of all backgrounds fear and loathe a hostile elite. Political memes like “the Deep State,” “the 1%,” “Drain the Swamp,” “the Davos Set,” and “Masters of the Universe” each capture this feeling of alienation, suspicion, and helplessness.

Historically speaking, class rivalry is hardly unusual. But a political situation in which a ruling elite is actively hostile towards the population it governs is quite rare, but not without precedent.

Updated: 5/27/2018

With conservatives, the immigration question brings these feelings of betrayal to the surface, perhaps in their most pronounced form. The popularity of the chant “Build The Wall!” reveals this. “The Wall” is tacitly understood, by those who resonate with it, as a means of re-gaining control over their communities and country. In turn, both liberals and those who could properly described as political and social elites view “The Wall” as far more than a barrier to illegal entry: it is an attack on their values, if not a direct attack on them.

More than any other issue, the immigration question represents a yawning gap between elite and popular opinion, between the Republican establishment and its White voting base. If U.S. immigration policy since 1965—beginning with the Hart-Celler Act of that year—had ever been presented honestly, as leading directly to minority status for Whites by the mid-21st century, and if White people could vote on this basis while they were still some 85-90 percent of the country, it might never have passed. In a very real sense, this policy is illegitimate and we should view its effect in changing the demographic balance of the country as illegitimate. As I have argued based on the historical evidence, U.S. immigration policy stemming from the 1965 sea change is the result of the activism of an ascendant Jewish elite that now holds a dominant position in our culture—dominant in the sense that they are able to severely punish those who dissent from this project of racial replacement by, for example, slanting media coverage and threatening loss of job, and it is able to significantly reward those who go along with it—everyone who has any aspirations to public life understands what can and cannot be said, and great careers await those who go along with the system.[1] This change in the demographic balance of the country was accomplished by promulgating a new “science” of race, stemming ultimately from ((((((((((((Franz Boas)))))))))))) and his protégés and entrenched in the top academic institutions, by founding and funding lobbying groups and positive media coverage.

The second component of this onslaught is that so many Whites are enthusiastically engaged in this project. They understand the reward-punishment choices and go along with them. Furthermore, many Whites are genuinely motivated by feelings of guilt and a desire to be virtuous—a virtue defined by incessant propaganda emanating from elite universities and media and facilitated by a science of race and by invidious, politically and ethnically motivated historical accounts of the history of White America. Others are motivated by misguided, suicidal dedication to “principles”—especially the individualist inheritance of Constitutional government, individual liberty, etc.

The theme here is the same—betrayal by a hostile elite and complicity of many of our own people targeting a vulnerable population which they hold in contempt.

Recently, the phenomenon of “The White Death” has entered the public consciousness and received comment by mainstream and elite sources.[2] In a nutshell, working class Whites are dying at an increasing rate, whereas most studies show the mortality rates of non-Whites decreasing. For working-class Whites, almost every indicator of social dysfunction and depression are increasing: they are committing suicide; they are using drugs more often and with damaging results; they failing to establish families; they are sleeping more, watching television and streaming services, etc.

The opioid crisis is an intense expression of this broader phenomenon. The past two decades have witnessed a major increase in the use of prescription opioids as a means of pain management. Abuse has become rampant and a black-market economy has arisen. The most common of these drugs is oxycodone (marketed under the names OxyContin and Percocet); the synthesized drug fentanyl, which resembles heroin and morphine in its potency,

As the New York Times reports,

The current opioid epidemic is the deadliest drug crisis in American history. Overdoses, fueled by opioids, are the leading cause of death for Americans under 50 years old — killing roughly 64,000 people last year, more than guns or car accidents, and doing so at a pace faster than the H.I.V. epidemic did at its peak.[3]

Fatalities resemble those of a World War. Some 250,000 people, mainly Whites, have died as a result of the abuse. The journal STAT has estimated that some 500,000 might die as a result over the next decade.[4]

This story of the opioid epidemic cannot be properly told without an understanding of the dynamic between the working class and the American and global elite. This dynamic is similar in many ways to the framework of my book The Culture of Critique, except that, rather than positions at prestigious universities, contracts with top-notch publishers, and media influence, it’s mainly about the financial benefits to the Sackler family resulting in the deaths of around 250000 mainly White people—and still increasing year over year. As in The Culture of Critique, this was a top-down movement based ultimately on fake science created at the highest levels of the academic medical establishment, motivated by payoffs to a whole host of people ranging from the highest levels of the academic-medical establishment down to sales reps and general practitioner physicians.

A lot of the discussion centers around research by economists Anne Case and her husband, Nobel-winning Angus Deaton claiming that the increase in mortality comes from “deaths of despair [that] come from a long-standing process of cumulative disadvantage for those with less than a college degree. The story is rooted in the labor market, but involves many aspects of life, including health in childhood, marriage, child rearing, and religion.”[5]

My basic theory here is that it’s not really about despair. I argue there are two things at work here: one is the decline in our culture generally brought about by the 1960s’ counter-cultural revolution affecting health in childhood, marriage, child rearing, and religion. But added to that is a very specific situation involving opioid drugs that in turn is linked to academic researchers willing to falsify data for financial gain, a corrupt pharmaceutical industry, especially Purdue Pharma owned by the Sackler family, and lax government regulation of drugs because of manipulation by the pharmaceutical industry.

The General Cultural Decline in the West since the 1960s

First the general decline in our culture. One of the themes of The Culture of Critique is that in general people on the lower end of the bell curve have been disproportionately affected by the cultural changes that have come to the fore since the 1960s. This was especially a theme of the chapter on psychoanalysis that focused on the effects of the sexual revolution. In general people on the lower end of the bell curve benefit more from strong social supports — in particular, support for marriage and against out-of-wedlock births. In my previous life teaching developmental psychology, the chapter on the family had charts showing that beginning in the 1960s there have been dramatic increases in out-of-wedlock births and divorce, resulting in many more children being raised without fathers. This opened up new fields in child psychology as psychologists investigated the effects on children of these cultural shifts. The results are clear: divorce, single parenting, and births out of wedlock are strong risk factors in a wide range of child problems, including delinquency, criminality, poor performance in school, poor physical and emotional health and early mortality—exactly the outcomes emphasized by Case and Deaton.

A theme of The Culture of Critique is that Jews were fundamental to the success of the countercultural revolution of the 1960s, whether it was as leaders of campus radicals or promoting the sexual revolution. Chapter 4 is dedicated to the assault on traditional Western sexual culture by psychoanalysis and related movements, and I emphasize that this revolution had a disparate impact on different IQ groups. Jews suffer to a lesser extent than non-Jews from the erosion of cultural supports for high-investment parenting and the decline in religious belief. Because Jews are a relatively high-IQ group, they have been relatively immune from these negative effects.

A major theme of The Bell Curve is that divorce and other measures of family dysfunction are more common at the lower end of the IQ distribution. The only reason I use IQ is that it is studied much more and can be very precisely measured, but you could get the same findings by using impulse control. People at the lower end of the IQ distribution also have more difficulty controlling their impulses, they are more prone to instant gratification rather than long-term planning and would be expected to be more prone to drug addiction.[6] As a result, they suffer more from the erosion of cultural supports for high-investment parenting—delaying sexual intercourse, not getting pregnant before marriage, etc. When I was going to high school no one was having sex in my school—a Catholic school where the traditional supports were strongly in place. But we have to understand that since the 1960s there has been a very successful attack on this culture.

There’s no question that traditional religious belief was a major part of those cultural supports. Quoting from Chapter 4 of TheCulture of Critique:

As [Norman] ((((((((((((Podhoretz)))))))))))) (1995, 30) notes, “it is in fact the case that Jewish intellectuals, Jewish organizations like the American Jewish Congress, and Jewish-dominated organizations such as the ACLU… have ridiculed Christian religious beliefs, attempted to undermine the public strength of Christianity, and have led the fight for unrestricted pornography.” The fact is that psychoanalysis as a Jewish-dominated intellectual movement is a central component of this war on [non-Jewish] cultural supports for high-investment parenting. …

Although other factors are undoubtedly involved, it is remarkable that the increasing trend toward low-investment parenting in the United States largely coincides with the triumph of the psychoanalytic and radical critiques of American culture represented by the political and cultural success of the counter-cultural movement of the 1960s.

We should never forget that this war was inaugurated by ((((((((((((Sigmund Freud)))))))))))), a fake scientist who hated the people and culture of the West and imagined himself as Hannibal conquering Rome. And of course, people like ((((((((((((Freud)))))))))))) have come a long way in accomplishing just that. This was not a revolution motivated by love of humanity but by hatred toward the people and the culture of the West.

These trends have occurred in all races but they affect Blacks more than Whites because on average Blacks are lower on impulse control and around one standard deviation lower than Whites on IQ. Blacks have always had higher percentages of out-of-wedlock births, but the gap widened to the point that now ~72% of Black births are out-of-wedlock compared to ~36% for Whites, with Asians having even lower rates (~17%).[7] This fits with Phil Rushton’s ranking of evolved race differences.. Sexual behaviors are heritable (genetically influenced): a study showed that before the sexual revolution, age of first intercourse was not influenced genetically because there were strong social norms against pre-marital sex; if there is no variation, then there can be no genetically influenced variation by definition, and as a result age of first sexual intercourse was not heritable.[8] So in my high school, since no one was having sex, age of first intercourse was not heritable. But after the sexual revolution it became heritable: people prone to a slow life history pattern and high control of impulses were more able to delay onset of sexual behavior, avoid childbirth outside of marriage, and stay married. As would be expected given Rushton’s theory, the sexual/cultural revolution has been disastrous most of all for Blacks. In 1965, 24 percent of Black infants and 3.1 percent of White infants were born to single mothers compared to ~72% and ~36% now.[9]

From “Was Moynihan Right?

But here we are going to concentrate on Whites. In his book Coming Apart Charles Murray notes that for Whites beginning in the 1960s, there has been an increase in crime, lower levels of religiosity, work ethic, and marriage. For the upper-middle class, marriage went from 94% to 84% between 1960 and 2010, but for the White working class it went from 82% to 48%. For the White working class, never-married went from 10% to 25%; and there has been dramatically lower work force participation. Murray attributes this to a loss of “virtue” but he doesn’t discuss the forces and motivation behind this massive cultural shift.

From “Was Moynihan Right?

It’s common among critics of Murray to claim that these shifts are all about economics rather than the broader culture. From this perspective, in the America of 1963, a high school graduate might expect to find a job which would allow him to marry and permit his wife the leisure to stay home and raise children. He could buy a freestanding house and a car, and still afford to take the family on a two week vacation every summer. The wife would have been reared with a view to preparing her for the duties of marriage and motherhood; she may even have taken ‘Home Ec’ in high school.

The problem with this is that all the trends affecting marriage and the family started in the 1960s when the White working class was doing well, reaching its “heyday” (Case & Deaton) in the early 1970s and stagnating thereafter. The steep upward trend in social/family dysfunction begins in the 1960s and continues to climb until around 1990 when it temporarily falls back before reaching new highs. By 1970, when the White working class was at its economic peak, out of wedlock births had already increased 3-fold from 1960 levels.

There’s no question that the period from 1948 to the early 1970s was the golden period for the working class (non-supervisory production workers)—strong unions and no outsourcing. But since 1973, the income for this group has actually increased ~9% (Figure 3 of a Pew study[10])—much less than for college-educated, but this is stagnation. It is certainly not a disaster. By itself, it shouldn’t cause increases in mortality given medical advances in the area of heart disease and cancer.

The Opioid Crisis is at the Root of Increased White Mortality

Case and Deaton point out that any economic explanation must explain why stagnant incomes cause early mortality in Whites but not in Blacks or in Europe, and they have a chart showing that “even if we go back to the late 1960s, the ethnic and racial patterns of median family incomes are similar for whites, blacks, and Hispanics, and so can provide no basis for their sharply different mortality outcomes after 1998.” This also rules out widening income inequality (“your income is going up faster than mine”), and it also precludes loss of virtue aided by generous welfare and disability programs because Europeans also have strong programs in these areas.

(However, I should note that recently University of Colorado researchers claim that they will soon be publishing an article showing similar increases in Blacks and Hispanics since 1998,[11] but this still wouldn’t explain why these effects are not seen in Europe in several studies).

In general, according to Case and Deaton, the increased mortality among the White working class begins in the 1990s. The first cohort to really show increased mortality was the one born in 1950—they were 40 years old in 1990 and thus the first generation to experience the counter-cultural revolution as teenagers. For every cohort after that, the increased mortality from drug poisoning, liver disease, alcohol, and suicide starts at an earlier age and is steeper—it gets to higher levels faster. These trends are higher among men than women and vary by education, with Whites with high school or less showing by far the worst effects.

A 2016 article in the New York Times elaborates on the findings of Case & Deaton based on their examination of 60 million death certificates from 1990–2014, but pins the blame squarely on opioids, not on alcohol or suicide.“[12] “While the death rate among young whites rose for every age group over the five years before 2014, it rose faster by any measure for the less educated, by 23 percent for those without a high school education, compared with only 4 percent for those with a college degree or more.” They also found White mortality much higher than for Black mortality and argued that doctors do not prescribe opiates to Blacks because of fear they may sell them or become addicted, although the previously mentioned study by University of Colorado researchers suggests mortality for Blacks and Hispanics from opioid poisoning is also rising. The Colorado study also agreed with the New York Times study in not finding increases in deaths due to alcoholism and pinned the phenomenon squarely on the opioid epidemic. They note that mortality rates “took off around the time when prescription opioids became readily available, and it has kept rising steadily ever since.”

Given that the trend in mortality may not occur among Blacks and Hispanics and doesn’t occur in Europeans, we can’t suppose that the cultural shifts inaugurated by psychoanalysis are to solely blame. The general decline in the culture is separate from increases in mortality — just because your family relationships are dysfunctional doesn’t mean you are going to die young. However, I suspect that these two factors interact in the sense that if the cultural supports that existed up until the 1950s had remained in place, the White working class would not have succumbed to the opioid epidemic. Again, I stress that people with faster life history profile are less able to control their impulses and thus more prone to maladaptive behavior in a culturally permissive environment awash in drugs and where religious and other cultural constraints on sexuality have been removed. Putting these two things together— the cultural shifts brought about by the triumph of the counter-cultural revolution and the glut of opioid drugs — was a disaster for the White working class. In this regard it’s interesting that the first generation to show increased mortality was the one that became teenagers in the 1960s.

As I have noted, the problems disproportionately affecting the White working class stem from the changes wrought by the 1960s counter-cultural revolution. But the specific problem of increased mortality has to do mainly with opioids, likely in a context where working class Whites are less attached to their jobs—do not find their jobs rewarding, where they have available to them generous disability programs, where they are less likely to gain financially from experience on the job (unlike jobs where promotions are possible), and are more likely to experience pain as a result of their jobs than college-educated Whites. However, the example of European Whites shows that, even with very generous disability payments and the same profile for working class jobs as less rewarding, less likely to benefit from experience, and more likely to result in pain, there has been no upsurge in mortality.

My proposal is that the problem for the White working class is a greedy pharmaceutical industry that has manipulated government regulating agencies and mainstream opinion in the medical profession. A fundamental problem in dealing with this now is the cat is out of the bag. These trends toward increased mortality over 1999 levels will continue no matter what the government does about OxyContin. Increased regulation simply forces addicts into heroin and other illegal drugs. The latest data show that deaths from drug overdoses continue to increase, now around 65,000 per year, despite increased government regulation.

The Sackler Family Is Fundamentally Responsible for the Opioid Crisis.

This all started with Purdue Pharma, owned by the Sackler family. This is an amazing and very depressing story.

Originally, OxyContin-type drugs were used only for severe pain — as continues to be the case in Europe, so their use was quite limited. Purdue’s program was to get OxyContin prescribed for even minor pain. Part of that was to claim that OxyContin was less addictive because it was timed-release, but simply breaking the pill up before swallowing negated the timed-release and they were well aware of that. Their promotional materials emphasized their humanitarian motives—what could be more high-minded than relieving pain without fear of addiction.

Purdue essentially created a very large community of people who benefited financially from prescribing opioids. They set up and funded organizations that lobbied for more aggressive treatment of pain by treatment with opioids. Millions were funneled into organizations like the American Pain Society and the American Academy of Pain Medicine and Purdue’s own advocacy group, Partners Against Pain, as well as to medical professionals willing to provide data supporting the movement. Purdue hired an army of sales reps to promote opioids to all medical personnel, from doctors to physician assistants. A consistent part of the pitch was to minimize addiction rates. Purdue claimed addiction rates were less than 1% by cherry picking studies that did not examine the effects of long-term use.[13] Other studies often showed much higher rates, as high as 50%. This misrepresentation was at the root of the $600M judgement against Purdue obtained by the US government.

The original study claiming very low rates of addiction was in 1986 by R. K. Portenoy based on 38 patients.[14]

Portenoy, of Metropolitan Jewish Health System in New York City, gained renown in the 1980s and 1990s for advocating consideration of opioid painkillers for patients with chronic pain of all kinds, at a time when such use was discouraged. In the 2012 WSJ interview, he conceded that research had not backed up the effectiveness of opioids for these types of pain and that the risks of addiction and other adverse effects were greater than he previously had indicated.

Portenoy also maintains financial relationships with opioid drugmaker Purdue Pharma, as well as other scores of other pharmaceutical companies, many of which have pain offerings: Afferent, Cephalon, CNSBio, Covidien, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Mallinckrodt, Grupo Ferrer, King Pharmaceuticals, NicOx, Prostraken, Shire, Solvay, Wyeth, Xenon, Archimedes, Baxter, Calloway, Flamek, Fralex, GW Pharmaceuticals, and Pfizer.[15]

Once Purdue showed how much money could be made, other pharmaceutical companies jumped into the market. When confronted with data showing that addiction rates were much higher, Portenoy recanted his strong claims but still maintained that opioids were a great treatment for non-cancer pain. And in any case, the damage was already done.

Propublica to their credit has taken a major role in showing how doctors and various organizations benefit from the pharmaceutical industry. It’s a pervasive problem in all areas of medicine,[16] but quite often it’s because they promote drugs that don’t really work compared to placebos. They are not killing tens of thousands of people. Nevertheless, the lesson is to stay away from prescribed drugs as much as possible and do thorough investigations before taking anything. This is an incredibly corrupt industry from top to bottom and it goes way beyond being a specifically Jewish problem. However, the opioid epidemic is in large part a Jewish story.

When it comes to pain management, Propublica emphasizes the roles of two Jewish physicians, Scott Fishman and Perry Fine, prominently associated with the American Pain Foundation which got 88% of its budget from Purdue and other pharmaceutical companies. Fine has been funded by at least a dozen drug companies and Fishman has had relationships with at least eight companies, including Purdue, for which he was a consultant, paid speaker and recipient of research support.[17] They claim that all this financial remuneration did not affect their opinions. And if you believe that, you are an idiot.

The FDA also played an important role, for example, not reviewing Purdue’s promotional literature which included a video that claimed addiction was “very rare”; this was eventually removed, but the damage was done. And of course, even if addiction rates were low when patients used the drug as their doctors intended, many quickly learned to break the tablets up and snort it or inject it. Again, becoming addicted is more likely to occur in people who have less impulse control—those in the lower part of the bell curve.

Purdue left no stone unturned. Hospital accreditation groups also played a role. Hospitals were required by the feds to administer questionnaires to patients recording their pain experience on a 10-point scale, and were threatened with loss of accreditation if they were found to be allowing too much pain.

In 2006, it … became mandatory to poll discharged patients about whether their pain had been adequately assessed and treated during their stay. The change was put in place by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services acting on recommendations of the Joint Commission, the national nonprofit health care quality organization that accredits hospitals [which was funded by Purdue[18]]. The results of these surveys are posted online and they contribute substantially to how the Joint Commission ranks hospitals. The results of these surveys can affect whether or not a hospital is eligible for Medicaid reimbursements, so scoring poorly can affect a hospital’s bottom line. In 2012, the Affordable Care Act made this connection even more direct when it gave Medicare the ability to withhold a portion of hospital reimbursement if patient satisfaction scores were low.

Unsurprisingly, under this regime, the number of opioid prescriptions increased dramatically. Worried that their survey scores would be low for not treating pain aggressively enough (and under pressure to address this), doctors began liberally prescribing opioids.(Jeremy Samuel Faust, ‘The Untold Story of America’s Opioid Addiction)[19]

Esquire’s Christopher Glazek writes:

Flush with cash, Purdue pioneered a high-cost promotion strategy, effectively providing kickbacks—which were legal under American law—to each part of the distribution chain. Wholesalers got rebates in exchange for keeping OxyContin off prior authorization lists. Pharmacists got refunds on their initial orders. Patients got coupons for thirty-day starter supplies. Academics got grants. Medical journals got millions in advertising. Senators and members of Congress on key committees got donations from Purdue and from members of the Sackler family.

They flew doctors to “seminars’ in fancy vacation destinations. Doctors who didn’t get on board were offered speaking fees to endorse OxyContin.

The feds finally sued Purdue in 2007, with Purdue pleading guilty to felony charges, admitting that it had lied to doctors about OxyContin’s abuse potential. Under the agreement, the company paid $600 million in fines and its three top executives at the time pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges—after thousands of deaths as a result of their actions. The executives paid $34.5 million out of their own pockets and performed four hundred hours of community service. It was one of the harshest penalties ever imposed on a pharmaceutical company but how can one take it seriously when the people responsible got away with pleading guilty to misdemeanors at a time when by 2001 Purdue was selling $1 billion of OxyContin yearly. In total, Purdue Pharma has made $35 billion, and the Sackler family walked away with around $13 billion.[20]

Misdemeanor pleas for being responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people while walking away with billions.

Perhaps the height of cynicism was in 2010, when Purdue reformulated the drug to be less easy to snort—very near the end of its patent on the original version. So it got more years of patent protection.

So the Sackler family is in the clear and is now posing as great humanitarian philanthropists. It’s well known that opioid addiction in mothers has a devastating effect on newborn babies:

Opioid withdrawal, which causes aches, vomiting, and restless anxiety, is a gruesome process to experience as an adult. It’s considerably worse for the twenty thousand or so American babies who emerge each year from opioid-soaked wombs. These infants, suddenly cut off from their supply, cry uncontrollably. Their skin is mottled. They cannot fall asleep. Their bodies are shaken by tremors and, in the worst cases, seizures. Bottles of milk leave them distraught, because they cannot maneuver their lips with enough precision to create suction. Treatment comes in the form of drops of morphine pushed from a syringe into the babies’ mouths. Weaning sometimes takes a week but can last as long as twelve. It’s a heartrending, expensive process, typically carried out in the neonatal ICU, where newborns have limited access to their mothers.[21]

Because of this sort of thing, the Sackler family has been especially motivated to make people think they care about children: “Several have made children a focus of their business and philanthropic endeavors. One Sackler heir helped start an iPhone app called RedRover, which generates ideas for child-friendly activities for urban parents; another runs a child-development center near Central Park; another is a donor to charter-school causes, as well as an investor in an education start-up called AltSchool.

And because they are such wonderful people they have donated to high-profile institutions, always with their name on it. So we have the Sackler Galleries at the Royal Academy Of Arts in London; the Sackler Wing of Oriental Antiquities at the Louvre; The Arthur M. Sackler Gallery at the Smithsonian, Washington, and the Sackler gallery in Ashmolean Museum at Oxford University, The Raymond and Beverly Sackler Institute for Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences at Yale, and the Sackler School of Graduate Biomedical Sciences at Tufts. There is effusive praise from the beneficiaries. Tufts spokesperson said “It would be impossible to calculate how many lives you have saved, how many scientific fields you have redefined, and how many new physicians, scientists, mathematicians, and engineers are doing important work as a result of your entrepreneurial spirit. You are a world changer.”

So Sackler is being praised for saving lives at a time when the opioid epidemic they started has claimed the lives of over 250,000 mainly White people.

One wonders if the Sacklers would have attempted to engage in such a campaign in Israel. Instead, they established the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, a medical school which is part of Tel Aviv University.

Conclusion

The opioid phenomenon reflects aspects of Jewish activism in general. These are top-down movements that are well-funded,  they have access to the most prestigious institutions of the society, and, because of this prestige, they are able to propagate fake science. In the case of the Jewish drive to enact the 1965 immigration law, pro-immigration committees were funded, fraudulent academic studies were created on the benefits of immigration, prominent people were recruited (like JFK, recruited to put his name on a book titled A Nation of Immigrants written by Myer ((((((((((((Feldman)))))))))))) and published by the ADL), positive articles about immigration appeared in the media, lobbyists and politicians were paid. The main fake scientists discussed in The Culture of Critique were the Boasians with their fake race science (utilized in the debates over the immigration law of 1965), psychoanalysis with its fake sex science, and the Frankfurt School with its fake theory that ethnocentric Whites have a psychiatric disorder resulting from poor parenting. Like the fake scientists who participated in promoting the opioid epidemic, these activists had access to prestigious academic institutions and, in the case of the Frankfurt School and other activist academic research in the 1950s and 1960s, their research was funded by the organized Jewish community, such as the American Jewish Committee, and promoted by Jewish academics.

Or consider the neoconservative infrastructure, with think tanks funded, prominent spokesmen at prestigious universities, and a very large media presence. Neocons can bet that if they are forced out of a job in the Departments of State or Defense that they will have many options to fall back on. Despite promoting disastrous policies, such as the war in Iraq, and despite their obvious ethnic loyalties to Israel, they are still a very powerful component of the U.S. foreign policy establishment.

Jews are an incredibly successful and influential group. We can’t win unless we understand that.

Who is the (((Sackler))) Family?

The middle Sackler brother Mortimer is pictured with his wife Theresa, right, and daughter Marissa, left, at the 2003 Stella Artois Tennis Championships at the Queens Club in London. After Arthur Sackler died in 1987, Mortimer and his younger brother Raymond bought his option of Purdue Pharma for $22.4 million

The youngest Sackler, Raymond, is pictured with his wife Beverly. Raymond was in control of Purdue Pharma after Arthur died, and in 1999, passed the reigns to his son Richard. The father-son duo were working at Purdue when the company began manufacturing OxyContin and using questionable advertising practices to promote it

The children and grandchildren of the three Sackler brothers, who started a pharmaceutical empire, continue to enjoy luxurious lifestyles and properties, such as the multi-million-dollar Central Park apartment in this building which is owned by Mortimer’s oldest daughter, Ilene Sackler Lefcourt – who was listed as a director of Purdue’s sister company, UK-based Napp Pharamaceutical Holdings, as of December 2016

Richard Sackler, son of founding brother Raymond, headed Purdue from 1999 to 2003 and oversaw much of the increasing sales of OxyContin as it was being falsely advertised; as of December 2016, he was still listed as a director of sister company Napp Pharmaceuticals and now lives on this sprawling estate outside of Austin, Texas that features six bedrooms, six bathrooms, a pool and stunning views of Lake Austin

THE SACKLER FAMILY: A DYNASTY OF PHYSICIANS, ADVERTISERS AND PHILANTHROPISTS

Arthur Sackler, the eldest of the three brothers, paved the way for the family’s future wealth in 1952 when, at the age of 39, he bought a small pharmaceutical company called Purdue Frederick in lower Manhattan

Arthur Sackler, the eldest of the three brothers, paved the way for the family’s future wealth in 1952 when, at the age of 39, he bought a small pharmaceutical company called Purdue Frederick in lower Manhattan

It all started in 1952, when the Sackler brothers paved the way for the family’s future wealth by purchasing a small pharmaceutical company called Purdue Frederick in lower Manhattan; Arthur held an option to purchase a portion of stock while his younger brothers were active players in the new venture. (When Arthur eventually died in 1987, the option was sold to Mortimer and Raymond.)

At the time of the Sacklers’ Purdue Frederick purchase, Arthur and his brothers had already established successful careers as physicians. Mortimer and Raymond Sackler did substantial research in the fields of psychoanalytic disorders and drugs used to treat them. Their industrious legacy has trickled down through the family: Mortimer’s daughter Marissa went on to found the non-profit startup Beespace, which is involved with the Malala Fund, and Raymond’s son Richard eventually became Purdue’s president.

The company sprung from its humble beginnings when Arthur proved himself again as a trailblazer after he began working with a small ad agency in New York City, and excelled so much there that he went on the buy the company altogether. He possessed a unique understanding of the need for advertisements to appeal to its specific audience – a technique that was still in its infancy during the 1950s – catalyzing the hysteria surrounding new medical discoveries of the era such as steroids, antibiotics, and psychoactive drugs.

Arthur built up his experience by producing contracted advertisements for other pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer and Roche in the late 1950s and 1960s. It was then that he began to cultivate questionable practices.

For a Pfizer ad promoting a new antibiotic called Sigmamycin, Arthur designed a spread of doctors’ business cards which were pictured next to the phrase: ‘More and more physicians find Sigmamycin the antibiotic therapy of choice.’ The only problem was – the doctors didn’t actually exist. An investigation in 1959 discovered that the doctors’ names printed in the ad were fabricated.

Arthur’s Roche advertisement in the 1960s was for Valium – depicting a woman surrounded by concerned doctors and family members because of her ‘psychic tension’, a 20th century term for what is now just considered stress. Valium became the first drug in US history to top $100 million in sales.

This work earned Arthur a spot posthumously in the Medical Advertising Hall of Fame in 1997 – citing his achievement of ‘bringing the full power of advertising and promotion to pharmaceutical marketing’.

After Arthur’s death, his branch of the Sackler family claim to have distanced themselves from the Purdue empire. His daughter Elizabeth told DailyMail.com she has never profited from Purdue Pharma or OxyContin

After Arthur’s death, his branch of the Sackler family claim to have distanced themselves from the Purdue empire. His daughter Elizabeth told DailyMail.com she has never profited from Purdue Pharma or OxyContin

When Arthur died, Raymond and his brother Mortimer purchased Arthur’s share of Purdue Pharma for $22.4 million while pioneering its sister company, Napp Pharmaceuticals, in the United Kingdom. Napp Pharma headquarters in Cambridge, England are pictured here 

Like their parents, cousins Elizabeth and Richard both have set up charitable funds in their names. Websites are not available for either. Elizabeth Sackler (second from left) is pictured with (from left) Director of the Brooklyn Museum Anne Pasternak, activist ((((((Gloria Steinem)))))), First lady of new York City Chirlane McCray and honoree Angela Y Davis at the 2016 Brooklyn Museum's Sackler Center First

Mortimer and his wife Theresa were known as international philanthropists, and are pictured here in 2004 at the Cartier Dinner at the Chelsea Physic Garden 

Mortimer and his wife Theresa were known as international philanthropists, and are pictured here in 2004 at the Cartier Dinner at the Chelsea Physic Garden

Despite their prominent status in the medical community, the Sacklers struck gold using their skills in advertising, publicizing products in a way that wooed the nation into popping pills by the billions.

When Purdue, and by proxy the Sacklers, developed OxyContin in 1996 – it was the same penchant for questionable advertising that landed them, and the nation, in trouble.

By this point, Arthur had already passed away in 1987, and the company was being headed by the youngest Sackler sibling, Raymond. Raymond and his brother Mortimer purchased Arthur’s share of Purdue Pharma for $22.4 million while pioneering its sister company, Napp Pharmaceuticals, in the United Kingdom. Less than a year before Raymond died in July 2017, Purdue was valued at $13 billion by Forbes.

In a statement to DailyMail.com, Arthur’s widow, Jillian Sackler, said: ‘Arthur died nearly a decade before Purdue Pharma – owned by the families of Mortimer and Raymond Sackler (his brothers) — developed and marketed OxyContin. At the time of his death in 1987, Arthur was lauded for his contributions to medical research, medical communications and museums.

‘He was a renowned art collector and connoisseur, and because of this, we have the Arthur M. Sacker Gallery of Chinese Stone Sculpture at The Met, the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery at the Smithsonian, the Arthur M. Sackler Museum at Harvard, the Jillian and Arthur M. Sackler Wing of Galleries at the Royal Academy and the Arthur M. Sackler Museum of Art and Archaeology and the Jillian Sackler Sculpture Garden at Peking University. None of the charitable donations made by Arthur prior to his death, nor that I made on his behalf after his death, were funded by the production, distribution or sale of OxyContin or other revenue from Purdue Pharma. Period.

‘Further, as a physician and medical scientist, Arthur was moved by a curiosity and desire to improve lives with new therapies. He made a substantial part of his fortune over 50 years in medical research, medical advertising and trade publications. His philanthropy in medicine extended to the Arthur M. Sackler Center for Health Communications at Tufts University and the Arthur M. Sackler Sciences Center at Clark University.

‘All these gifts, made in the 1970s and 80s, were made independently of his brothers and their families.’

A ‘MIRACLE DRUG’: HOW OXYCONTIN CAME TO BE – AND DUPED THE NATION 

From 1999 to 2003 the company was run by Raymond’s son Richard Sackler. He oversaw much of the increasing sales of OxyContin as it was being falsely advertised 

From 1999 to 2003 the company was run by Raymond’s son Richard Sackler. He oversaw much of the increasing sales of OxyContin as it was being falsely advertised

From 1999 to 2003 the company was run by Raymond’s son Richard Sackler.

Former Purdue employees told the New Yorker that Richard, now 72, is fiercely private, but extremely eccentric in the workplace. Richard assisted his father throughout the 1980s as the company pioneered their revolutionary ‘time-release’ morphine pill, which would gradually break down in the body over a longer period of time than traditional medications.

Purdue’s United Kingdom equivalent, Napp Pharmaceuticals, debuted their first time-release morphine pill in 1981 – known as the ‘Contin’ system. Six years later, in 1987, the MS Contin system made the jump to the United States.

The drug had one primary consumer: cancer patients. MS Contin was supposed to be able to provide longer-lasting pain relief throughout the night without needing an IV. However, this niche market was not incredibly lucrative, so Richard made it his goal to find broader uses for the Contin system.

Dr Andrew Kolodny, an addiction expert and Co-Director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, explained further how Richard was able to make MS Contin became more widely prescribed, and gave way to the development of OxyContin.

He told DailyMail.com: ‘MS Contin was coming off patent, and that product had only really been prescribed to people with cancer at the end of life. You’re not going to make much money if your product is only being used by people at the end of their life. So they wanted to make a product prescribed for common chronic pain – people with pain from cancer is not a common condition.

‘Some of the patients enrolled in their clinical trials had a very hard time coming off of the drug – so [its addictive qualities] should not have been a surprise to them,’ he continued.  

The Sacklers' pharmaceutical efforts began with brothers Arthur, Mortimer and Raymond; in 1952, they bought a small pharmaceutical company called Purdue Frederick in lower Manhattan. Arthur's children were not actively involved in the business, but sons and daughters of Mortimer and Sackler - as well as the wives they were married to at the time of their deaths - continued directorship of Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings, based in Cambridge, England; this family tree outlines the Sackler descendants and their connection with the family business

The Sacklers’ pharmaceutical efforts began with brothers Arthur, Mortimer and Raymond; in 1952, they bought a small pharmaceutical company called Purdue Frederick in lower Manhattan. Arthur’s children were not actively involved in the business, but sons and daughters of Mortimer and Sackler – as well as the wives they were married to at the time of their deaths – continued directorship of Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings, based in Cambridge, England; this family tree outlines the Sackler descendants and their connection with the family business

Richard Sackler's former Greenwich, Connecticut home - where he lived with his wife and children before he divorced and moved to Texas - was situated on two acres, featured seasonal water views and a community dock in the gated neighborhood and included a pool and pool house

Richard Sackler’s former Greenwich, Connecticut home – where he lived with his wife and children before he divorced and moved to Texas – was situated on two acres, featured seasonal water views and a community dock in the gated neighborhood and included a pool and pool house

Richard Sackler's former Greenwich home boasts a vaulted gallery and airy open spaces, befitting a family whose philanthropy often focused on the arts

Richard Sackler’s former Greenwich home boasts a vaulted gallery and airy open spaces, befitting a family whose philanthropy often focused on the arts

Richard's Greenwich home has since been sold; these real estate photos from last year show contemporary furnishings in the coveted residence

Richard’s Greenwich home has since been sold; these real estate photos from last year show contemporary furnishings in the coveted residence

Jonathan Sackler, Richard's brother and son of youngest brother Raymond, has been a huge supporter of education and has given tens of thousands in donations to the Democratic party; he and his wife have also held a fundraiser in their home (pictured)  in the exclusive enclave of Greenwich, Connecticut, with gorgeous views of the Long Island Sound

Jonathan Sackler, Richard’s brother and son of youngest brother Raymond, has been a huge supporter of education and has given tens of thousands in donations to the Democratic party; he and his wife have also held a fundraiser in their home (pictured)  in the exclusive enclave of Greenwich, Connecticut, with gorgeous views of the Long Island Sound

Dr Kathe Sackler and her wife, Susan Shack Sackler (fourth and third from left, respectively) are well-known for their philanthropic efforts; Kathe is the second daughter of founding brother Mortimer and was also listed as a Napp director as of December 2016 

Dr Kathe Sackler and her wife, Susan Shack Sackler (fourth and third from left, respectively) are well-known for their philanthropic efforts; Kathe is the second daughter of founding brother Mortimer and was also listed as a Napp director as of December 2016

Dr Mortimer Sackler, Jr - who was also listed as a Napp director as of December 2016 - is pictured with his wife, Jacqueline, at the Winter Dance 2006 Desert Oasis sponsored by Versace at The American Museum of Natural History in February 2006

Dr Mortimer Sackler, Jr – who was also listed as a Napp director as of December 2016 – is pictured with his wife, Jacqueline, at the Winter Dance 2006 Desert Oasis sponsored by Versace at The American Museum of Natural History in February 2006

In 1990, then-Vice President of clinical research at Purdue, Robert Kaiko, suggested that they begin developing a new time-release pill containing oxycodone instead of morphine.

Though both drugs are opiates derived from the poppy plant, oxycodone came into the public eye at a time when morphine was being demonized – following a mass addiction to heroin by Vietnam veterans after the war.

Purdue’s product containing purely oxycodone – OxyContin – hit the shelves in 1996. A press release advertising the drug promised 12 hours of ‘smooth and sustained pain control’, diminished presence of ‘common opioid-related side effects’, and ‘improved patients’ quality of life, mood, and sleep’.

Oxycodone was then considered among doctors to be less powerful and addictive then morphine, though it was actually nearly 50 per cent stronger.

‘The argument they made was that since the drug is a longer lasting or slower release of the euphoric effect, it would be safer,’ Dr Kolodny continued.

However – the exact opposite was true, and the result has been devastating. Recreational drug users discovered that by crushing, snorting or injecting the OxyContin pills, they could bypass the time-release effect and get the full impact of the pill immediately.

In 2016, drug overdoses took the lives of 64,070 people – outnumbering the total American lives lost in the entirety of the Vietnam War.

Bob Josephson, Purdue’s executive director for communications, provided the following company statement to DailyMail.com: ‘Despite how our critics portray us, and having less than 2% of all opioid prescriptions, Purdue has led industry efforts to combat prescription drug abuse which includes collaborating with law enforcement, funding state prescription drug monitoring programs and directing health care professionals to the CDC’s Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. In addition, we’ve recently announced educational initiatives aimed at teenagers warning of the dangers of opioids and continue to fund grants to law enforcement to help with accessing naloxone.’

FROM THE 90s TO NOW: OXYCONTIN’S PATH OF DESTRUCTION

Overdose deaths due to opioid drugs have steadily been on the rise for the last two decades, since the invention of OxyContin. The preliminary reports for 2016 only came to light in August of 2017, because characterizing overdose deaths is a difficult science.

The Centers for Disease Control estimate that prescription opioids killed 14,400 people in 2016.

President Trump declared last month that the opioid epidemic is now a national public health emergency, saying: ‘As you all know, from personal experience, families, citizens and Americans across the country are currently dealing with the worst drug crisis in American history.’

In declaring the widespread drug abuse a ‘public health emergency’ – efforts to combat opioid addiction now have access to a Public Health Emergency Fund totaling just $57,000.

This month, opioid commission member Patrick Kennedy slammed Trump’s declaration as a ‘sham’ – and that the government’s low-ball funding would not even scratch the surface of what is needed to combat the epidemic. In addition, many of President Trump’s policies stand to make the situation worse – including the proposed cuts of $722 billion to Medicaid by 2026.

For many, the issue has become one that can’t be ignored. It’s been a family member, a partner, or a loved one that has overdosed – and now it’s personal.

Revered photographer ((((((((((((Nan Goldin)))))))))))) published the devastating truth about her battle with OxyContin, and has launched a social media campaign with the hashtag #ShameonSackler to raise awareness about the family’s role in the crisis.

President Trump declared last month that the opioid epidemic is now a national public health emergency, which makes only $57,000 of public funding available

President Trump declared last month that the opioid epidemic is now a national public health emergency, which makes only $57,000 of public funding available

The artist was shocked to learn that the Sackler family was behind the production of the deadly drug, having seen their name grace the sides of galleries and museums she loved - such as the Sackler Courtyard, pictured here, at the Victoria & Albert Museum in London

The artist was shocked to learn that the Sackler family was behind the production of the deadly drug, having seen their name grace the sides of galleries and museums she loved – such as the Sackler Courtyard, pictured here, at the Victoria & Albert Museum in London

When she learned that the Sackler family, whose named she’d grown accustomed to seeing in art galleries around the world, was responsible for creating the drug her body couldn’t resist, she was furious. Her life revolved around her addiction, she wrote, and the drugs were so easy to come by. Like many others, her addiction began when she was prescribed Oxycontin after undergoing surgery. Because of the drugs highly addictive properties, once she started, she couldn’t stop.

‘Counting and recounting, crushing and snorting was my full-time job,’ she said. ‘When I ran out of money for Oxy I copped dope. I ended up snorting fentanyl and I overdosed.’

She survived – and went into rehab, and has now been clean for over a year. But she’s seen how Oxycontin has irreparably destroyed her community – much like the HIV/AIDS epidemic did in the 1980s.

She continued: ‘I regret the time I lost, which is irretrievable. Now I find the world hard to navigate, but I have a sharpened clarity and a sense of purpose.’

In a statement, Elizabeth Sackler said: ‘The opioid epidemic is a national crisis and Purdue Pharma’s role in it is morally abhorrent to me. I admire ((((((((((((Nan Goldin))))))))))))’s commitment to take action and her courage to tell her story. I stand in solidarity with artists and thinkers whose work and voices must be heard.

‘My father, Arthur M. Sackler, died in 1987, before Oxycontin existed and his one-third option in Purdue Frederick was sold by his estate to his brothers a few months later. None of his descendants have ever owned a share of Purdue stock nor benefitted in any way from it or the sale of Oxycontin. I stand with all angry voices against abuse of power that harms or compromises any and all lives.’

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT: THE MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT THAT COULDN’T STOP THE SACKLERS

In 2007, an affiliated company, Purdue (Frederick), and three of Purdue’s executives pleaded guilty to ‘misbranding’ of Oxycontin – by saying it wasn’t addictive.

Purdue’s top lawyer, Howard ((((((((((((Udell)))))))))))), former medical director, Paul Goldenheim, and then-president Michael ((((((((((((Friedman)))))))))))) were sentenced to probation and agreed to pay more than $600 million in fines along with Purdue (Frederick) for their actions. It was one of the largest pharmaceutical settlements in American history.

Purdue Pharma released an official statement: ‘Nearly six years and longer ago, some employees made, or told other employees to make, certain statements about OxyContin to some health care professionals that were inconsistent with the F.D.A.-approved prescribing information for OxyContin and the express warnings it contained about risks associated with the medicine. The statements also violated written company policies requiring adherence to the prescribing information.

‘We accept responsibility for those past misstatements and regret that they were made.’

Despite this, the drug hit peak sales at $3 billion in 2010.

Purdue's former medical director Paul Goldenheim was involved in the settlement of a $600 million lawsuit against the company. He was placed on probation

Purdue's top lawyer Howard ((((((Udell)))))) was also placed on probation following the $600 million lawsuit. He was since passed away

Because the Sacklers had largely stepped away from direct management positions at that point, Purdue’s top lawyer, Howard ((((((((((((Udell)))))))))))) (right), former medical director, Paul Goldenheim (left), and then-president Michael ((((((((((((Friedman)))))))))))) were sentenced to probation and agreed to pay more than $600 million in fines

Though the Sacklers weren’t at the helm of Purdue at the time, but remained on the board of directors, they were spared them the brunt of the legal blowback that followed the scandal.

Richard, the last of the Sackler men, stepped down as President of Purdue Pharma in 2003, but remains on its board.

He sits on several other distinguished boards: Yale Cancer Center Advisory Board, Advisory Council for the Department of Astrophysical Sciences at Princeton University, Board of Overseers of the Tufts University School of Medicine, and the MIT Cancer Center Advisory Board.

Like their parents, cousins Elizabeth and Richard both have set up charitable funds in their names. Websites are not available for either.

Richard and his ex-wife Beth, divorced in 2013, made a number of donations through their foundation over the years, including to three anti-Muslim organizations that are characterized as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center, according to Esquire.

They also donated to True the Vote – a volunteer organization that aimed to stop voter fraud that inspired President Trump’s fictitious claim that three million undocumented immigrants voted in the 2016 election – stopping him from obtaining the popular vote.

Richard Sackler did not return the DailyMail.com’s request for a comment.

HORRIFIC OPIOID OVERDOSES ACROSS THE NATION

As President Trump has dubbed the opioid crisis a public health emergency – it’s revealed that opioids killed more Americans in 2016 than in the entirety of the Vietnam War, at an estimated death rate of 64,070 overdose deaths.

It’s an issue so pervasive that it has become personal for citizens nationwide. High profile opioid overdose deaths like those of Prince and Tom Petty have become as common as those of small town Americans. Some law enforcement officers have posting footage from the scene of dangerous overdoses in a desperate bid to make others aware of the severity of the situation.

In most cases today,deadly overdoses from prescription opioids like OxyContin aren’t as common. Rather, it’s the initial prescription of drugs like OxyContin for legitimate medical purposes that is the driving factor to the path of addiction. Even when taking OxyContin on the exact order of doctors, it is possible to still become addicted. If so, the need for the drugs euphoric symptom becomes unavoidable, and many will switch to heroin to obtain the same affect when OxyContin or other opioid drugs become too expensive, according to a 2014 study by JAMA.

Preliminary CDC data published by The New York Times shows US drug overdose deaths surged 19 percent to at least 59,000 in 2016. That means that for the first time drug overdoses are the leading cause of death for Americans under 50 years old.

Shocking photos posted on various social media sites have documented the real-world implications of what the overdose epidemic looks like.

The emergence of the synthetic opioid fentanyl has increased the frequency of fatal drug abuse, as its incredible potency makes it up to 40 times stronger than heroin. Ohio police sparked controversy by posting a photo of two parents passed out from an opioid overdose while driving with their child in the back seat. They defended their actions by expressing hope that it would raise awareness to the overwhelming prevalence of opioids in the country.

The horrific trend continued in Indiana when a 25-year-old mother was found unconscious with a syringe still in her hand while driving with her daughter in the back seat.

Ohio police sparked controversy by posting a photo of two parents passed out from an opioid overdose while driving with their child in the back seat
The horrific trend continued in Indiana when a 25-year-old mother was found unconscious with a syringe still in her hand while driving with her daughter in the back seat

Ohio police sparked controversy by posting a photo of two parents passed out from an opioid overdose while driving with their child in the back seat (pictured left). The horrific trend continued in Indiana when a 25-year-old mother was found unconscious with a syringe still in her hand while driving with her daughter in the back seat

DEA Acting Administrator ((((((((((((Rosenberg)))))))))))) said in 2016 of the annual drug report: ‘Sadly, this report reconfirms that opioids such as heroin and fentanyl – and diverted prescription pain pills – are killing people in this country at a horrifying rate.

‘We face a public health crisis of historic proportions. Countering it requires a comprehensive approach that includes law enforcement, education, and treatment.’

Overdose deaths are now the leading cause of death among young Americans – killing more in a year than were ever killed annually by HIV, gun violence or car crashes.

IN A CRISIS OF HISTORIC PROPORTIONS: IS ANYTHING BEING DONE?

Dr Andrew Kolodny, an addiction expert and Co-Director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, told DailyMail.com that most people who become addicted to heroin began as OxyContin users who were prescribed the drug for a legitimate medical condition

Dr Andrew Kolodny, an addiction expert and Co-Director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis University, told DailyMail.com that most people who become addicted to heroin began as OxyContin users who were prescribed the drug for a legitimate medical condition

Purdue Pharma has made some effort to rectify the rampant addiction to their products. In 2012, the company debuted an abuse-deterrent version of OxyContin. Unlike its original formula, the new OxyContin cannot be crushed into a powder that can be snorted. Rather, it dissolves into a gel-like substance – which makes it more difficult to be injected.

Dr Kolodny also explained that these ‘abuse-deterrent’ drugs aren’t the solution to the problem.

‘It might release the drug a little slower than the original version– but basically that’s the main thing, it’s been made harder to crush for snorting or injecting. These deterrent formulations don’t do very much,’ he said.

By 2013, the FDA had outlawed the original formula of OxyContin, only allowing sales of its new gel version. Still, drug deaths climbed, particularly in rural areas where there is more manual labor. Because of the greater likelihood of developing chronic pain in manual labor, doctors in rural areas tend to prescribe painkillers ‘more aggressively,’ according to Dr Kolodny.

Nearly two decades after a letter to the Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine pioneered OxyContin’s initial safety – the same publication condemned it.

A study published in the journal revealed that most opioid users found ways around the new abuse-deterrent formula, and once addicted, they switched to cheaper options – primarily heroin.

Dr Kolodny said that most people who become addicted to heroin began as OxyContin users who were prescribed the drug for a legitimate medical condition. In addition, despite the fact that heroin deaths are rising among a younger population, he says that it is actually older people who are dying in greater numbers from OxyContin overdoses because they are prescribed it more often.

‘They [doctors] think that older people can’t get addicted,’ he said.

‘Older people who get addicted don’t have to switch so much, they can still get lots of pills pretty easily from doctors. Older people are overdosing from pills, younger people are overdosing on heroin, and now heroin with fentanyl mixed into it – or fentanyl sold as heroin, that’s where we’re seeing many deaths going up right now.

‘If you’re young and healthy-looking, they don’t want to give you a lot of pills every month, so once you’re addicted to maintain your supply you end up having to find an illicit source,’ he said. ‘The pills are very expensive on the black market, so people who are young and healthy looking and can’t get lots of pills from doctors, they switch to heroin.’

FIGHTING BACK: FIVE STATES HIT HARDEST BY THE EPIDEMIC SUE PURDUE

Efforts to hold the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma responsible for their actions for the last decade have been widespread, but largely unsuccessful.

On Tuesday, Alabama joined the ranks of more than 200 states, cities, and counties who have sued the company for the impact that OxyContin has had on their communities.

Last month, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio waged war on big pharma – and is suing Purdue, among other companies, for $500 million in damages caused to New York City by its residents crippling addiction to opioid products.

Last month, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio waged war on big pharma – and is suing Purdue, among other companies, for $500 million in damages caused to New York City by its residents crippling addiction to opioid products

Last month, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio waged war on big pharma – and is suing Purdue, among other companies, for $500 million in damages caused to New York City by its residents crippling addiction to opioid products

In Kentucky, where opioid overdose deaths are among the highest in the nation, state officials were determined to confront the Sacklers with the proof of what OxyContin and heroin had done to their residents. As a result of the lawsuit, Purdue conducted a report on Pike County, Kentucky – an area substantially affected by the opioid crisis, as an attempt to demonstrate the potential for bias in their jury.

The report was damning: 29 per cent of Pike County residents said they personally knew, or someone in their family knew of someone who had died of an OxyContin overdoes, and 70 per cent of the sampled demographic said OxyContin was ‘devastating’ to the area.

Pike County isn’t even the hardest-hit by overdose deaths in Kentucky. A 2016 Overdose Fatality Report found that the counties containing the state’s largest cities, Louisville and Lexington, saw 1,782 overdose deaths that year alone, compared to just 128 in Pike County.

As a result of the lawsuit, Richard Sackler traveled to Louisville in 2015, nearly eight years after the suit was first filed, to give a deposition about his role at Purdue and its faulty advertising of OxyContin.

The contents of that deposition have been the subject of a tense legal battle in the years since. Soon after his trip, Purdue Pharma settled with the state for $24 million – far more than their original offer of $500,000. The company admitted no guilt in the public health crisis that has consumed Kentucky, and millions of trial documents were destroyed or sealed, including Richard Sackler’s deposition.

A judge ruled in 2017 that his statements should be made public – Purdue appealed the decision. His deposition remains under a protective order.

EFFORTS ABROAD: PURDUE’S PURSUIT TO KEEP OXYCONTIN ALIVE

Since the original OxyContin formula has now been banned in the United States, the abuse-deterrent version is the only one available. However, it’s being bypassed for safer treatments in recent years.

In China, however, Oxycontin has become particularly popular. As its population boomed, so did cancer rates. Among the elderly, the need for management for chronic pain is dire.

Dr Kolodony said: ‘They say risk of addiction is extremely low, fear of addiction shouldn’t be a barrier to compassionate treatment, that’s basically the way they promote it.’

‘It’s pretty awful, they’re using the same playbook that worked for them here and created an epidemic – knowing very well what happened here they’re doing the same way abroad,’ he continued.

Former addict and photographer ((((((((((((Nan Goldin)))))))))))) puts it a bit differently.

‘They have washed their blood money through the halls of museums and universities around the world. We demand that the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma use their fortune to fund addiction treatment and education. There is no time to waste.’

If you do not understand by now, why jews historically have been kicked out of EVERY white nation throughout history, nothing, I mean nothing will wake you the fuck up.

(((THEY))) MUST BE REMOVED FROM OUR NATIONS

ALL OF THEM.

 


[1]Kevin MacDonald, “Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881–1965: A Historical Review,” March 1998, accessed December 5, 2017, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226113583JewishInvolvementinShapingAmericanImmigrationPolicy1881-1965AHistoricalReview.

[2]See, for example, Victor Tan Chen, “All Hollowed Out: The Lonely Poverty of America’s White Working Class, The Atlantic, January 16, 2016, accessed December 5, 2017, https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/white-working-class-poverty/424341/.

[3]Maya Salam, “The Opioid Epidemic: A Crisis Years in the Making,” the New York Times, October 26, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/26/us/opioid-crisis-public-health-emergency.html?_r=0.

[4]Max Blau, “Opioids Could Kill Nearly 500,000 Americans in the Next Decade,” STAT, June 27, 2017, accessed December 5, 2017, https://www.statnews.com/2017/06/27/opioid-deaths-forecast/.

[5] Anne Case & Angus Deaton, ‘Mortality and morbidity in the 21st century,’ https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/6_casedeaton.pdf

[6] ‘The psychometric assessment of human life history strategy: A meta-analytic construct validation,’ accessed December 5, 2017: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262972058_The_psychometric_assessment_of_human_life_history_strategy_A_meta-analytic_construct_validation

[7] Roger Clegg, ‘Latest Statistics on Out-of-Wedlock Births,’ National Review, Oct 11 2013, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/360990 accessed December 5, 2017.

[8] M.P. Dunne, ‘Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Variance in Age at First Sexual Intercourse,’ http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00414.x, accessed December 5, 2017.

[9] G.A. Akerlof, ‘An Analysis of Out-Of-Wedlock Births in the United States,’ August 1996, https://www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/, accessed December 5, 2017.

[10] Lawrence Michel, Elise ((((((((((((Gould)))))))))))) & Joel Bivens, ‘Wage Stagnation in Nine Charts,’ Economic Policy Institute, January 6, 2015, http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/, accessed December 5, 2017.

[11] ‘Opioids and obesity, not ‘despair deaths,’ raising mortality rates for white Americans,’ Science Daily, July 20, 2017, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170720142334.htm, accessed December 5, 2017.

[12] Gina Kolata & Sarah ((((((((((((Cohen)))))))))))), ‘Drug Overdoses Propel Rise in Mortality Rates of Young Whites,’ New York Times, January 16, 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/17/science/drug-overdoses-propel-rise-in-mortality-rates-of-young-whites.html?_r=0, accessed December 5, 2017.

[13] Art Van Zee, ‘The Promotion and Marketing of OxyContin: Commercial Triumph, Public Health Tragedy,’ American Journal of Public Health, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2622774/, accessed December 5, 2017.

[14] R.K. Portenoy and K.M. Foley, ‘Chronic use of opioid analgesics in non-malignant pain: report of 38 cases,’ May 1986, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2873550, accessed December 6, 2017.

[15] Portenoy Opioid Talk Sparks Controversy: Opioid advocate Russell Portenoy’s invitation to an upcoming NIH workshop is under fire. Medpage Today, https://www.medpagetoday.com/painmanagement/painmanagement/47855, accessed December 22, 2017.

[16] See for example, Alison Bass, Side Effects: A Prosecutor, a Whistleblower, and a Bestselling Antidepressant on Trial (Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, 2008); Melody Petersen, Our Daily Meds: How the Pharmaceutical Companies Transformed Themselves into Slick Marketing Machines and Hooked the Nation on Prescription Drugs (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2008); Christopher Lane, Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness (Yale University Press, 2008).

[17] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/279187-responsible-opioid-prescribing-info, accessed December 7, 2017.

[18] Report to Congressional Requesters, ‘Prescription Drugs,’ December 2003, https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04110.pdf, accessed December 7, 2016.

[19] Jeremy Samuel Faust, ‘The Untold Story of America’s Opioid Addiction,’ Slate, June 3, 2016, http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2016/06/prince_s_death_reveals_how_wrong_our_over_reliance_on_dangerous_opioids.html, accessed, December 7, 2017.

[20] Vijay Prashad, ‘Big Pharma’s Pushers: the Corporate Roots of the Opioid Crisis,’ Counterpunch, November 17, 2017, https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/11/10/big-pharmas-pushers-the-roots-of-the-opioid-crisis/, accessed December 7, 2017.

[21] Christopher Glazek, ’The Secretive Family Making Millions from the Opioid Crisis,’ Esquire, October 16, 2017, http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a12775932/sackler-family-oxycontin/, accessed December 7, 2017.

 

Updated: 5/27/2018

Opioid Crisis Takes A Toll On Economic Outlook

For Many Americans, Fed Says

 

A volunteer cleans up needles used for drug injection that were found at a homeless encampment in Everett, Wash., in November. Respondents in a Federal Reserve survey who knew someone who had been addicted to opioids were less likely to give the economy a favorable rating.

Ted S. Warren/AP

One out of five Americans say they personally know someone who has been addicted to opioids or prescription painkillers, according to a new report about the economic well-being of U.S. households.

The Federal Reserve report, based on a national survey, also found that exposure to opioid addiction was twice as likely among whites, regardless of education level, as among African-Americans.

Survey respondents who knew someone who had been addicted to opioids were less likely to give the national or local economy a favorable rating.

It was the first time the Fed has included questions about opioid addiction in its annual survey, which began in 2013.

Economists are taking seriously the idea that opioid abuse and addiction are having an impact on the economy. ((((((Alan Krueger)))))), a professor of economics at Princeton University, found in an August 2017 report that as much as 20 percent of the decline of male participation in the labor force could be related to opioid abuse.

Other parts of the Fed’s new report showed incremental improvement on most issues: 74 percent of adults surveyed said they were doing “okay” or “living comfortably” in 2017. That’s up from 60 percent in 2013.

Most workers were satisfied with their wages and benefits last year, and less than a fifth of working adults were pessimistic about future employment opportunities.

Still, there were areas of concern. Many adults surveyed said they don’t have enough savings to cover an unexpected financial setback of $400 without having to borrow or sell something.

That’s of particular concern to Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate.com. “Nothing is more fundamental to achieving financial stability than having savings that can be drawn upon when the unexpected occurs,” he said.

The Fed’s report found that those with a high school degree or less were more likely to say their well-being has declined. Those with at least a bachelor’s degree were the most likely to notice an improvement in their finances over the past year.

About a third of U.S. adults have at least a bachelor’s degree.

The Fed’s survey showed great disparity along racial and ethnic lines when it comes to retirement savings. Forty-three percent of white respondents said they thought their retirement savings plan was on track. That compares to 25 percent for African-Americans and 28 percent for Hispanics.

America’s opioid crisis afflicting

growing number of elderly people

5/27/2018

The face of the nation’s opioid epidemic increasingly is gray and wrinkled.

But that face often is overlooked in a crisis that frequently focuses on the young.

Consider this: While opioid abuse declined in younger groups between 2002 and 2014, even sharply among those 18 to 25 years old, the epidemic almost doubled among Americans over age 50, according to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Because of information like that, the Senate Special Committee on Aging convened a hearing Wednesday on opioid misuse by the elderly.

“Older Americans are among those unseen in this epidemic,” said Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr., Pa., the top Democrat on the panel. “In 2016, one in three people with a Medicare prescription drug plan received an opioid prescription. This puts baby boomers and our oldest generation at great risk.”

Unwittingly, Medicare compounds the epidemic by funding needed opioids that can be abused, but, generally, not funding the care and medicines needed to fight opioid addiction.

“Overall, one in three older Americans with Medicare drug coverage are prescribed opioid painkillers. However, while Medicare pays for opioid painkillers, Medicare does not pay for drug and alcohol treatment in most instances, nor does it pay for all of the medications that are used to help people in the treatment and recovery process,” William B. Stauffer, executive director of the Pennsylvania Recovery Organizations Alliance, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, said at the hearing. “Methadone, specifically, is a medication that is not covered by Medicare to treat opioid use conditions.”

Offering scary statistics and practices involving older folks, Gary Cantrell, a deputy inspector general at the Department of Health and Human Services, said “our nation is in the midst of an unprecedented opioid epidemic.”

He focused on Medicare Part D beneficiaries. Part D is the prescription drug section of Medicare, the government health insurance program covering older people. About a half-million Part D recipients “received high amounts of opioids” in 2016, Cantrell said. Almost 20 percent of that group are at “serious risk of opioid misuse or overdose,” he warned, placing the high risk in two categories – those receiving “extreme amounts of opioids” and some “who appeared to be ‘doctor shopping.’ ”

Doctor shoppers “each received high amounts of opioids and had four or more prescribers and four or more pharmacies for opioids,” Cantrell explained. “While some of these beneficiaries may not have been doctor shopping, receiving opioids from multiple prescribers and multiple pharmacies may still pose dangers from lack of coordinated care. Typically, beneficiaries who receive opioids have just one prescriber and one pharmacy.”

Many elderly get hooked on opiates through prescriptions, rather than street drugs like heroin.

“Older adults are at high risk for medication misuse due to conditions like pain, sleep disorders/insomnia, and anxiety that commonly occur in this population,” said Stauffer, who is in long-term recovery. “They are more likely to receive prescriptions for psychoactive medications with misuse potential, such as opioid analgesics for pain and central nervous system depressants like benzodiazepines for sleep disorders and anxiety. One study found that up to 11 percent of women older than age 60 misuse prescription medications. The combination of alcohol and medication misuse has been estimated to affect up to 19 percent of older Americans.”

Sixty-one-year-old Denise Holden is in long-term recovery, too, but she became addicted as a young woman seeking a heroin high. She’s been in recovery for almost 25 years, after first using drugs when she was 19. She got clean, then relapsed, as is common, then got clean again. Staying that way, even after decades clean, is not easy.

“I recently had back surgery,” the West Melbourne, Florida, resident said in an interview. “I had a spinal fusion and so I had been taking opiates for a period of time. You know, the older we get the more aches and pains we get. . . . We injure ourselves, we have surgeries. So, for people in recovery it’s a slippery slope because when you reintroduce that opiate to your system, your mind starts playing all kinds of tricks on you – ‘Oh you should take more, oh you should take less, oh you should throw them out. Oh no, take them all at once.’ It’s very difficult, like it’s a mind game. It is very challenging I would say, but it’s not impossible.”

Holden urged seniors to take medicines only as prescribed, and if they have suffered drug abuse to “work a very strong program of recovery.”

Addiction isn’t the only risk with opioids. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, chairwoman of the committee, said, “Older adults taking opioids are also four to five times more likely to fall than those taking nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs.”

That points to a vicious cycle. Taking opioids can lead to falls, falls can lead to pain, pain can lead to opioids and opioids can be abused. On top of that, doctors might not even realize the source of an elderly patient’s problem.

“Regrettably,” Collins added, “health-care providers sometimes miss substance abuse among older adults, as the symptoms can be similar to depression or dementia.”

America is dying, this is the end of the United States.

Those of you who can, must prepare for the collapse which is without a doubt on its way.