More EA-6B Prowlers


Not in Demand

The values of the woke don’t carry much water in war-torn Ukraine. (h/t Claudio) – from PJ Media – it’s a good article.

Perhaps most disturbingly for the Woke, none of the imperatives they value so much turned out to be much in demand in war. People proved far more interested in survival—in guns, power, water, firewood—than in climate change, social justice, or gender identity. Mobility depended on “fossil fuels,” and people scrounged for it. Where could anyone have charged an electric car in Ukraine anyway? Despite the reported death of the family as an institution, thousands risked or lost their lives searching for their parents, grandparents, children, and grandchildren. And when they met, there was no social distancing. They embraced. One of the small mercies of the war was that few were reputed to have died of Covid.


The Stroke Victim & Dementia Patient and pedophile…


T-Shirt Advertisement

You don’t see ads often on this blog unless I’m flogging a book or something. Sam Jacobs asked if I’d post it here and I am doing that. Second Amendment T-shirts.


Lost Star Catalog (h/t Claudio)

The Greek astronomer Hipparchus is often called the “father of astronomy.” He’s credited with discovering the Earth’s precession (how it wobbles on its axis) and calculating the motions of the Sun and Moon, among other achievements. Hipparchus was also believed to be compiling a star catalog—perhaps the earliest known attempt to map the night sky to date—sometime between 162 and 127 BCE, based on references in historical texts.

Scholars have been searching for that catalog for centuries. Now, thanks to a technique called multispectral imaging, they have found what seems to be the first known Greek remnants of Hipparchus’ star catalog. It was hidden beneath Christian texts on medieval parchment, according to a new paper published in the Journal for the History of Astronomy.


Kari Lake (Candidate for Arizona’s Governor)

Lake told ABC’s “This Week” host Jonathan Karl that if she’s elected in November, she would “serve eight years,” effectively putting to rest the rumors that she might be former President Donald Trump’s 2024 running mate if he runs for reelection.


Lindsay Graham’s Situation

The prissy Senatorial warmonger doesn’t want to testify about his role in the 2020 presidential election. (more here)


Racism is not Racial

(H/T JW for collaboration) Some claim that the White Race is a kind of clan, hence a natural clan loyalty, for membership in a clan creates a common interest demanding submission to the need for mutual action, regardless of circumstances or personal preferences. Your skin color is your uniform.

The claim goes further: Even those Whites not predisposed to vow fealty to Whiteness must do so since the other races shall combine against us, or already have. Examples of Jews protecting and promoting each other, Blacks receiving special and privileged treatment in corporate hiring, college admissions, and favorable news reporting, are used to show the combination against Whites. No one may print nor purchase WHITE LIVES MATTER on a tee shirt unless you are a famous black rapper who has an ex-wife with a massive ass end on her.

Hence, we Whites form a group as defined by their mutual enemies, so they might as well be loyal to it, and use race as a paramount consideration when determining their group membership and group actions.

So runs the argument.

I beg to differ. The White Race is not a clan. It is nothing of the kind.

A clan is a group of people related by blood. A race, in the older sense of the word, is a group of people related by language and culture and largely by blood but not necessarily by blood (as a Dark Irish is still considered an Irishman, despite Spanish blood in his veins).

In the older sense of the word, a Catalan, a Saxon, a Norman, a Prussian, a Langobard, a Cornishman, all were considered races, what we now call ethnicity.

In the new sense of the word, a race is a breed of mankind with some visible outward sign, more or less arbitrarily selected, to group a large number of ethnic groups together, hence the Whites, Reds, Blacks, and Yellows.

This was done for historical, not scientific reasons: Christendom spread south and east and crossed the Atlantic to discover the New World, and so divided the several (but related) races thus encountered into Asian, African, and American.

Where Semite races and Pacific Islanders fit into this rough category is a matter of debate. Sometimes Jews, Persians, and Italians are considered ‘White’ and sometimes not, depending on the preference of the speaker and the phases of the moon.

In the politically correct sense of the word, the word means any oppressed group, so ‘Hispanics’ which includes both Spaniards and Portuguese and Mestizos, Argentines and Mexicans and Patagonians and anyone else from Central or South America, is classed as a race.

Likewise “African-American” is classed as a race, even though the various tribes from which they ultimately come have few genetic markers in common.

“Orientals” are not classified as a race because the word is now considered offensive, but when Orientals are gathered together with Siberians, central Asians, Indians, and Middle-Easterners, and called “Asians” that is not offensive, even though there are two or three distinct races encompassed in the group.

Homosexuals are also classed as a race, women are classed as a race, and mentally ill people who think they are members of the opposite sex are just this year classed as a race. Islam is classed as a race even though it’s a religion and anyone can join.

A clan, by way of contrast, is a political as well as a religious and kinship unit.

A clan, in order to be a clan, must have some ability to act as a unit, and some form of leadership, even if diffuse. A modern American has little or none: other men named Wright, for example, will not leap to my defense out of clan loyalty, because none know of any blood ties to me.

On the other hand, among crime families, extended loyalties to cousins and second cousins overseas are often maintained, because the police form a common enemy, and their need to coordinate forms a common bond. With this comes a mystique.

The emotional ties of Hatfield to Hatfield and the bad blood between their foes, the McCoys, have no parallel in the alleged and invented unions called White and Black and Yellow and Red.

When a black, out of loyalty to another black, uses the excuse of a press lie about police brutality to riot and rob a liquor store, that is an expression of political, not racial loyalty. No black would rob anyone out of solidarity with Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas.

There is no common mystique binding White with White or Black with Black. There is no common leadership, common language, common culture, or common economic interests. Even if one wanted to build a city or a commonwealth on shared racial interests, there are none.

There is rationality and liberty on the one hand and insanity and slavery on the other.

The Left, no matter what they used to support, nowadays supports insanity and slavery. To gain power, the Left uses race as an excuse for stirring up group hatred. Except when they use sex, sexual orientation, or national origin, or religion.

Racism is not racial; it is political. This is so obvious I assume people who say otherwise are Leftists since no one but Leftists make a studied habit of denying the obvious.

The race loyalty preached, for example, by Hitler was a national race (old definition). He was not urging unity of all White races together. Indeed, the Slavic races were the particular foes of his pan-German movement.

I believe ignorant fellows on the Internet found an obscure immigration law from the Eighteenth Century which uses the term “Whites” and from this concludes that the Founding Fathers meant the nation to maintain a pan-European racial composition.

Unfortunately, the term in that context simply meant “Christians” but the founders, conscious of the First Amendment, did not want to write that language into the bill. They wanted a shorthand term to refer to men from the various European nations, and perhaps Canada, Florida, and Mexico.

Obviously, black slaves were excluded, as were the aboriginal savages. Since this was before the discovery of the Pacific Coast of America, there was no concern about Chinamen. So there was no other word to use.

But the conclusion that Whites, therefore, in the eyes of the Founding Fathers, represent some sort of political unity based on race is absurd.

In any case, loyalty follows from the worldview, which means, from religious faith in wise men to political party loyalty in fools. Loyalty is not determined by genes, but by the thoughts, your worldview has about genes.

Racism is a political stance, not an instinctive loyalty at work. The instinctive loyalty of an Irishmen, who is White, is to hate Englishmen, who are White. The instinctive loyalty of Koreans, who are Yellow, is to hate the Chinese, who are also Yellow. And the Chinese are not a race, but fifty different races, each with its own language and history, and, at one time, own culture.

Even if instinctive loyalties did draw Irishmen towards Englishmen, and Koreans toward Chinamen, nonetheless the idea that laws and customs should be based on such loyalties is a political idea.

If political ideas are instinctive, there is no point in debating them. If they are not, then the debate is political.

In the case of America, the obvious tie that binds all our loyalties together is Americanism, that is, the unique cultural and political worldview created here in the New World.

It is, in all modesty, the most astonishingly successful worldview in history. It was the view that men of any nation in Europe could come here and become American merely by adopting American values, virtues, and loyalty to our laws and customs.



  1. Americanism.
    The fundamentals of the Constitution are what bind us.
    The Charter. The principles. The philosophical underpinnings of our shared economy.
    Remove them, as the left is doing, and dissolution prevails.

  2. It’s worth mentioning that the concept of race is relatively new in human history. It seems to date back to 1508, in a poem by William Dunbar referring to a line of kings.

    As you’re pointing out, there is no genetic basis for race, there are no human subspecies, and there really is only one human race. My favorite factoid from researching this was ” Of the small amount of total human variation, 85% exists within any local population, be they Italians, Kurds, Koreans or Cherokees. About 94% can be found within any continent. That means two random Koreans may be as genetically different as a Korean and an Italian. ”

    Race is make believe. It has become the atomic bomb of argument and it’s literally based on nothing.

    • As it is used today, ‘race’ is meaningless except in the abstract sense that it is used by the left to mean, “something that I don’t like”. The concept of a people, a nation, a family, etc. is as old as time itself, but that’s never the attack phrase.

    • Yes but, external appearance is conserved, and that’s what our kinship racial instincts use for data.

      Genetic sequencing is now a home shop toy, with equipment for under $10K:

  3. As a note, Islam is a political system that has a religious arm. It is no different than other political systems that use the protected religion to further the agenda.

    • In the US, the “civic religion” is promoted by the established church, the public school system. Church attendance is compulsory, as is tithing. The purpose of the civic religion is to obscure that government is a protection racket.

      The Christian churches are a competing government. Instead of non-compliance being punished by prison, it is punished by an eternity in Hell.

      Just like the kings of England and Germany, who were cousins, frenemy governments mostly support each other against the taxpayers.

      • If you look back 1000 years or so, the competing feudal knights that met each other in battle had far more in common with each other than a particular knight had with the serfs who worked on his estate. The laws of chivalry that were more of an ideal than an actual rule didn’t apply to the commoners. Chivalric orders in particular were designed to reinforce that.

        As to religion being the opiate of the masses (Lennin), and state religion supporting the king (pick your king), sure. The sons of noblemen either inherited, became priests or warriors depending on birth order. They had far more in common and at stake in the collective sense than the commoners had with them. And since tithing wasn’t enough, they established a church rate, or tax formerly levied in each parish in England and Ireland for the benefit of the parish church. In so doing, the government’s due and that of the church were collected at the point of a bayonet. Germany, for example, had a church tax. I don’t know if they still do. Some cantons in Switzerland did as well.

        It doesn’t work like that in the US, but your point is taken.

  4. Graham is a limp-wristed entrenched swamp dweller with occasional outrage flare-ups. Next to useless. What has he actually done in his role other than to take up space?

    Excellent treatise on “Race”. With all the Left’s bloviating on the subject they have changed from championing “race-relations” in America to now using it as a weapon to bludgeon people they disagree. “Fickle” does begin to describe their mentality, but shows how their stances are not underpinned to anything solid or real; their position moves is a means to an end. Curious what MLK would say if he were walking around today? Probably blasting them…subsequently he’d be raided by the FBI.

    The WLM T-shirt is stupid. I get it. But what’s the point other than to draw attention to themselves and poke the rabid dog of those promoting the grift that was/is BLM? Owen’s has a lot of good to say, but in the end – and take this for what it’s worth – all these people are promoting their brand and business. It is their livelihood to be front and center. Yet, have they really changed anything? Results matter, not chatter. (Fitton is one who is in the real trenches.)

    Commenting as I do – mostly here – changes nothing. However, with good intent, it does offer a vented spleen here and there, or given to help others with a different perspective and know there are others with similar beliefs.

    Ukraine is Not Woke- A life axiom: “The first things to go in times of need or survival are all the 1st World extra programs that are only afforded in prosperous times.”

    People won’t continue to place emphasis on the “extra’s” (wind & solar, EV’s, legalizing MJ, etc.) when they can’t put food on the table, heat their house, or when some lunatic faction threatens. The aftermath of 9/11 proves this out, unfortunately it only last a month or two. This Winter there will be a lot of people who start to ignore the “woke” crap…tearing down their sheds to heat their houses. Wanna bet there’s a run on chainsaws and logsplitters.

  5. Sorry, folks. “Race is real.” Real on multiple fronts, though there are many problems with definitions, not the last of which are: 1) people use different mental definitions, and what is worse, they have no idea their definition is different from what the other guy is using in HIS head. So there is a lot of talking past each other. 2) as LL and many of you have pointed out, there are political and psychosocial-programming issues that FAR outweigh actual scientific concerns.

    There is a LOT to absorb in LL’s essay, and I’ve only read through once, so this is essentially a reaction off of the top of my head, not a fully considered one, but here goes.

    1. Race is a complex and ill-defined concept. I take it to mean a combination of genetic markers and traits, plus physical appearance (largely following from the genetic traits), and secondarily, culture. (It is an interesting and open question whether culture follows from “genetic race”. It is at least possible. Twin studies and adoptive studies, etc all offer support for this, though I view it at a relatively low level of evidence.)

    2. Racial stereotypes exist for a reason. They are NOT entirely made up by horrible racist white people. (And you haven’t experienced racism until you’ve had an honest talk with an East Asian, or a hard-core Orthodox Jew, to take but two examples. Ordinary American whites are about the LEAST racist persons on this earth.)

    3. Despite #2 above, one CANNOT with certainty predict an INDIVIDUAL’s behavior or attributes based on racial stereotypes. Therefore a decent (and rational) person will judge (and treat with) each individual by that individual’s behavior and abilities. BUT, it is perfectly correct to believe that aggregate behavior/characteristics have clusters that differ between groups (whatever “race” means). It is a starting point. We are TRAINED to do this in medicine, for one thing. Here is a sex/age-based example: “I’ve got a 60-year old sedentary, obese man, with hypertension and high cholesterol who presents with sudden onset sub-sternal chest pain after running a nearly a block after an Uber because he left his phone in it.” Versus, “A 30-year old woman with no significant medical history is here with chest pain. She is a marathoner and ran her last race a month ago in 3:35 without any problems.” First guy, VERY likely a heart attack. Second gal, quite unlikely. I’m still going to make sure marathon woman is not having a heart attack, but my suspicion is low. First guy, I’m activating the cath lab before the troponins even come back from the lab. Likelihood of other medical problems is also tied to group characteristics. Consider sickle-cell and sub-Saharan Blacks, or Tay-Sachs and Ashkenazim, and so forth.

    4. Medically speaking, race is real. This is an issue in things such as transplantation (organs, bone marrow) and even in optimal blood transfusion.

    The argument that WITHIN group variation is greater than mean BETWEEN group variation may be true, but it does not invalidate the concept of racial differences. (The problem is how to define race, not that there are no group differences.) Two examples.
    1. Men are stronger than women. This is a true statement, borne out by simple observation of the world, and by hundreds of legitimate studies. However, there are certainly individual women who are stronger than the average man. The existence of a strong woman does not invalidate the premise that men are stronger than women.
    2. Dinka (Sudanese, mostly, Africans) are taller than Chinese. Dutch are taller than Chinese. But out of a billion+ Chinese you can find a few who are taller than the average Dinka, or the average Dutchmen. But that does not make the statement that “D’s are taller than C’s” incorrect.

    The concept of “race” has been hijacked by the usual bad actors for their political agenda. But it is neither an incorrect concept, nor an inherently malicious one.

      • From the headline on a British tabloid today: Meghan Markle reveals she discovered she’s 43% Nigerian after doing a genealogy test. Peter Grant (BRM) is South African – maybe 100%. So is Charlize Theron. Yet they don’t make headlines.

      • Not all genetic characteristics define “race” but race is defined by constellations (clusters, groups, whatever you want to call them) of genetic markers.

        Of course midgets are not a race [1] nor are persons with, say Down Syndrome a race, though the latter have a unique and distinct genetic commonality.
        [1] while midgets are not a race, I’m mortally certain that blogger Kenny Lane would very much like to see a Midget Race. Maybe a 100-m dash. Though an attempt at steeplechase would be much more telegenic.

        • Dwarves are a represented minority but apparently, elves took ship into the setting sun and there are not any to be classified remaining. Pity. Orcs are heavily represented in the inner cities.

    • Excellent top of the head commentary. Spot on. And good analogy with medical clinic signs against the patient. Indicators that paint a picture are not political.

      Race (actual ancestry and DNA, not status or societal standing)…used to be a simple indicator, and for good reason. Now it’s a weapon being used by the activists and haters who have nothing better to do than foment chaos. The weird part is the willingness of the General Public to allow it…or worse, participate.

    • I think the lumper/splitter mind is in play here.
      A lumper will put into the same category everything that appears to have the same basic identifier. Sort of a ‘like breeds with like’ mindset.
      A splitter will point to a number of distinguishing marks and say each different mark indicates a different race/species.
      Naturally, the chaos generators prefer as many categories as possible in order to generate more chaos. This does not help the splitters’ cause any.

  6. Thank you for your very clear, very explicit definition of “amorphous.”
    Race relations in the US had been proceeding apace until the 2009 election of the “half-blood prince.”
    1. at times I have great difficulty differentiating between someone from the Asian continent and a person from South America; several times I’ve been astounded.
    2. I asked a friend born in China how he tells the difference between a Chinese and a Japanese – he replied, “Very easy! as soon as they start talking.”
    3. As for Jews being a tribe and supportive of each other: Yeah! Like a jockstrap without a cup. Anytime you want a good laugh you have to watch the interactions between a Gemischte like myself, who’s still considered Jewish, and the average Brooklyn Hassid

  7. Race. Great essay LL. Now race is used as a tool so people can use it to “take offense” at this, that, or the other thing. Taking offense brings them power because it is an almost natural tendency in most people to try and understand, and perhaps ameliorate the the hurt in the offended party.

    I try to treat all people as I would like to be treated and then adjust accordingly as they respond. I don’t accommodate peoples “feelings” near as much as I used to.

    Ukraine. This is obvious to this group but hardship and survival focuses the mind on what is important and leaves little or no room for fluff like wokeisms. The only reason that all the woke issues like climate change etc have gained a foothold is that civilization is advanced enough that the woke don’t have to worry about essentials and know that there are enough rules about treatment of people that somebody won’t shoot them for throwing paint on a picture in support of some cause even though the picture is worth millions. A few floggings in the publc square and that nonsense would stop.

    Prowlers. A remarkable airplane that was reinvented several times over its lifespan. Darn loud though, two of those on the flightline could drown out two F15Es and make it hard to think straight, even with double hearing protection.

  8. Philosophical discussions are interesting, stimulating even. At a practical level, I view anyone who is near me in the context of threat or no threat. Ethnicity, mode of dress, demeanor and body language are all factors, damn any political correctness. Two examples. Black man in a suit and tie – low threat. Young black man with one pant leg showing bare calf, alert. Hispanic in work clothing – low threat. Hispanic with numerous facial tattoos, alert.

    Any homogeneous group raises my alert level.

    • WSF Well said and I agree with most of what you said. As far as the homogeneous group goes well that depends on the group doesn’t it?

      Still start out treating people like I would like to be treated but understand it could go downhill pretty quick.

  9. Though I approve the sentiment, I no longer display 2A-related emblems or hardware logos on my vehicle or clothing. These days I prefer to maintain a lower profile.


    HG Wells described different racial types in his “Outline” which was first published shortly after WW I.
    He also speculated on the roots and development of various languages, which may be related.
    “White man’s burden.”
    “Master Race.”
    Affirmative Action.
    Race riots.
    “Can’t we all just get along?”
    Is “African-American” a race?
    See T. Roosevelt quote on assimilation.
    Does Diversity=strength?
    “Melting pot,” my eye.


  10. Nice shot of the Prowlers.

    Funny how “woke” vanished when “life” was more important.

    Excellent writing on the subject of “Race”. Reminds me of the old Star Trek episode where the two bi-colored aliens were fighting over which side of their body was white vs black.

  11. This strictly an observation that led me to formulate a question.
    We have a city friend that is very impulsive.
    A few years ago, over the course of about two months, she bought six each of four different varieties of Bantam chickens. About a week after each purchase of six she would realize that they were not working out in her city dwelling. She would then bring them to our country home and donate them to our mini-farm.
    Rinse repeat through all four varities.
    The thing that I found interesting (they were very much free range birds) was that they congregated as to variety and did not mix with the other varieties.
    I noted the old saw, “Birds of a feather flock together” and did not think much about that old wisdom until one day, I asked myself, “How do they know which flock to join?”.
    There were no mirrors in the barnyard.
    They do not even know what they look like.

    The ” free range” thing led to the individual flocks being defeated in detail by hawks, foxes, and the neighbor’s dog (the Silver Sebrights could fly like pheasants and were fatally adventurous),
    When the various flocks were reduced to one individual only then would they join another flock of a different variety.

  12. “There is rationality and liberty on the one hand and insanity and slavery on the other.”

    My, look how we’ve embraced the latter.

Comments are closed.