Showing posts with label Polls. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Polls. Show all posts

Thursday, 25 June 2026

Europe shifts Right...

More Blue = more Right. More Red = more Left

The left just normalized so much insanity that basic self-preservation now gets called “far right extremism.” 

Decades of open borders and failed assimilation delivered parallel societies, welfare strain, and crime spikes in city after city.
Green fanaticism delivered energy poverty and deindustrialization while virtue signaling.
Woke ideology delivered confused kids, erased women, and attacks on national identity.
And the result is voters across France, Germany, Italy, Poland, the UK and beyond are backing the parties the media smears as “far right.”
Those parties are simply saying what was common sense centrist a generation ago.
Secure borders. Citizens first. Affordable energy. Law and order. Protect children. Preserve your culture.
The Overton window got dragged so far left that reality, sanity, and common sense now look radical.
The Overton window got dragged so far left that reality, sanity, and common sense now look radical. H/t: @Rothmus
Meantime in Space:
Humanity's goal for the next century is... prevent WW3.*
Elon: "Okay, this is going to sound pretty crazy."
"I'd say the economy is 10 times the its current size in 10 years. Greater than. I feel like that's actually a fairly comfortable prediction."
"Obviously if there's like World War III or something. that that could put a kink in those plans or those expectations. In the absence of World War III, if current trends continue, I would say the the economy 10xes in 10 years and we have a base on the moon." H/t: @PeterDiamindis

Thursday, 21 May 2026

The Left dominates education … and Everything


The figures above are for the whole university academics. In some schools the skew is even stronger. In liberal arts for example, it’s something like 97% who self-define as Left.

It’s true that The Left has won. It’s won education, media, government. 

Yet still, you can get a Trump. Or a Milei. Or a One Nation.

Thursday, 7 May 2026

Women much more Left wing


 From a Gallup poll. So, pretty reliable.

I must say, I’ve noticed the trend. I’ve seen women I know well over the years, veer sharply left in recent times. Some due to Trump, no doubt. But not all. More of it down to social media.

Monday, 27 April 2026

Socialism has never been tried properly!

 

That’s what America’ young socialists say, when confronted with “socialism has always failed”. 

“But it’s never been tried properly!” 

Except that it’s been tried by at least 32 countries, since Marx foisted his dreary “Das Kapital” on the world. Including tried by the luminaries of socialism: Engles, Lenin, Stalin, Mao. And their success? According to AI it’s “none”. Not one or two, or “not many”. “None”. 

AI leans Left because it draws in sources that lean left. And yet, leftish as it is, AI still comes out with a clear and unequivocal answer to my Q: “how many of the 32 countries that tried socialism succeeded as socialist economies?”: A: “None”. 

Yet these neophytes, these Zoomers, think they can outthink the architects of socialism? That they will have better ideas of how to implement socialism than all 32 countries? That’s some chutzpah right there.

So our young American socialists go to another angle: “we want Democratic Socialism”.

Well that can’t work either. Because of this simple contradiction:

EITHER:
Socialism = state control of the means of production. Control = planning. Planning = no choice for workers as to what to produce = no democracy.
OR:
There is worker control in the factory = democracy = no need for state planning = not socialism. 

Nikos Sotirakopoulos talks about this in the vid above. Nikos is an ex Marxist. Like another of my all-time faves, Thomas Sowell. Who, when asked “why did you give up Marxism?” answered: “Reality”. 

“What about Scandinavia?” our young would-be socialists cry. Scandinavian countries are not socialist, as their leaders keep telling us. They’re market based economies with a lot of social support, paid for by high taxes. But capitalist all the same.

Should we worry a lot the growing attraction to socialism in America? YES. We should.

Polling:
68% of young Democrats have a “favourable view of socialism” (Cato, March 2025). 
Young Republicans by contrast: 5% have a favourable view of socialism (Harvard Youth Poll, November 2025). 

Where did they get the crazy idea to love on socialism these Democrat Zoomers? Mainly at school. Education by far-left leaning teachers. Amplified by Tic Toc etc..
Why don’t young Republicans lean the same? I don’t know. Natural scepticism perhaps? Parents who influenced? Peer groups?

Wednesday, 25 March 2026

"Why Are Liberals Against Liberation?" | Elica Le Bon

 

Elica Le Bon is an Iranian-born, American lawyer and activist for the people of Iran. Which is to say: ANTI the IRGC and PRO the strikes against it by Operations Epic Fury and Roaring Lion.

Her own family, mother, aunt, uncle, were all imprisoned by the IRGC regime in 1979. Her uncle was tortured and killed. Mother, aunt and cousin all made it to the U.K. where her father was, and where Elica grew up. 

I've posted her a number of times over the years. She's smart, quick, eloquent. 

On the outcomes of the current war: she sees either (hopes, really):

  • Complete surrender by IRGC, or 
  • Severe degrading of the IRGC such that they can't threaten the region or its own people. 

Anything else and it's going to be a rejuvenated IRGC. Even more radical. 

The people of Iran (Persian, Zoroastrian) are very different from the regime (Arabs and Muslim). Most Iranians -- 82% -- hate the regime, she says, quoting a poll by the Dutch non-partisan pollsters Gamaan. They are seen as the invaders, colonisers and despots. I agree with all of that. 

(Gamaan did a poll I quoted before, on "Iranian Attitudes to Religion", showing Shia Muslims are just 32% of the population. Atheist, Agnostic or None are 37%)

She explains the motivations behind IRGC and the Mullahs' hatred of Israel, the eschatology of their world view. And the spread of the Marxist oppressor/oppressed world view amongst the Left. 

Elica Le Bon is one of the many gorgeous Iranian women activists

Tuesday, 17 March 2026

U.S. population supports the Iran war | Rasmussen Reports

McLaughlin Poll: "The United States military actions against Iran and the  leadership of the Iranian regime were necessary and warranted to protect  American lives today and in the future."

A clear majority — 57% of likely voters — agreed, while only 33% disagreed.

Support was particularly strong among voters planning to support  Republican candidates for Congress, where agreement reached 87%,  compared with just 7% who disagreed.

Even among voters still undecided about their congressional vote, the statement won majority support at 51% to 29%.

The results also show meaningful support among several key demographic groups.

Among independent voters, 46% agreed the action was necessary, compared with 40% who disagreed.

Among Hispanic voters, agreement was 56% to 33%, and among women, the margin was 47% to 38% in favor."

Rasmussen Reports

I’m inclined to summarise this as strong support. Especially a whole three weeks into the war. 

Sunday, 15 March 2026

The biggest threat to Israel: terrorists in the “West Bank” | The Israel Guys

 

These days, Atheist Zionist that I am, I prefer to call the “West Bank” by its historical name, aka its Biblical name, “Judea and Samaria”.

Where, we see the Israel Guys, on the ground, describe the real and present danger of terrorism from some 2 million Arabs living there. 

To the international Left, these are not terrorists, but “freedom fighters”. They can only be so of you believe Israel has no right to exist on its own, never-abandoned, indigenous land. 

But I do accept Israel’s historical, legal and occupational right to exist. So, to me, as to the Israel Guys, they remain terrorists. Whose simple aim is explicitly genocidal: to kill the Jews, to drive them out of the Middle East and to make it “Judenrein”, Jew-free. 

Note the high level of support for Hamas in the Palestinian areas of Judea and Samaria: up to 80%, according to polls in 2025. 

Wednesday, 11 March 2026

“Iran is not what it seems” | Michael Doran and Gadi Taub

 

Journalists, academics and commenters Michael Doran and Gadi Taub, from the centre right perspective, give informed views of where the war is at and where it might end. Including pessimistic predictions. And including disagreements amongst themselves. 

At the end Gadi says that in Israel the Left  mainly looks at views from the left, but the Right tends to look at both left and right.  Michael says it’s the same in America. I agree. I’ve posted a number of times studies (e.g. “What the Left and Right read”, “Bubbles and Vortexes”) that show conservatives read and watch more widely across the political spectrum than does the Left.  Part of the reason being that the left is surrounded by the default media, which is the Mainstream media and which leans left: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, New York Times, Washington Post

“What’s the truth?”. Michael says “I don’t know”. Re: whether Arab states are urging Trump to continue to the end, or to stop. Polar opposites. The truth of that will come out eventually. Meantime “I don’t know” is a decent answer. 

Sometimes we know an Important Truth without necessarily knowing The Detailed Truth. Like: reports that 40,000 Iranians were murdered by the regime. Or is it “only” 7,000? The Important Truth is: “it’s a lot”. The Detailed Truth can come later. 

The best thing to get to the Truth or a good approximation of it is: read around the subject. Left, right and middle, including Social Media. A Venn Diagram with “the Truth” somewhere in the common area. 

Which for folks on the Left who follow the Iran war, means reading not just BBC and Bloomberg, but also people like Doran & Taub, above. 

There’s also media agglomeration sites, like Ground News. Which specifically gather all the views, far left to far right. 

There’s also one’s own Common Sense. The sniff test. Does it seem true. Not always the best test, biut surely a good first filter. 

Thursday, 19 February 2026

Why don't people get married any more? Why the declining global birth rates?

Tell me, Grok: why do you think it is that people are getting married less these days? I have three children and several nephews and nieces. All in relationships. None of my kids or nieces is married. If I ask why not marry, they say "shut up, dad!" or similar. So... I don't know. Do you?

It's a common observation these days, and you're not alone in noticing it among your own family. 

In Australia (and similar trends appear in many Western countries), marriage rates have been declining for decades, with a particularly sharp drop among younger adults. Recent data from sources like the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS), and surveys like HILDA show that:

The crude marriage rate has fallen from around 7 per 1,000 people in the early 2000s to about 5–5.5 in recent years (even after a post-COVID rebound).

Among people in their 20s and early 30s, the proportion who are married has dropped dramatically — for example, only about 20% of women aged 25–29 were married in recent surveys, compared to over 35% two decades ago.

De facto (live-in partner) relationships have risen correspondingly, now common for many couples, especially those with kids.

Your children's and nieces/nephews' generation (likely millennials and Gen Z -- "Zoomers") often see little practical need for formal marriage, especially since Australian family law treats long-term de facto couples almost the same as married ones for property, superannuation, spousal maintenance, and children. 

The "shut up, dad!" response is pretty classic — it's a mix of independence, eye-rolling at "old-school" ideas, and perhaps not wanting to explain deeper reasons.

Here are the main factors driving this shift, based on research and reports:

Marriage has become optional and more "deliberate"
People now view it as a conscious choice rather than a default life step. Many couples "try before you buy" by living together first (83% of couples who do marry have cohabited beforehand, up hugely from decades ago). If the relationship works long-term without the certificate, why add the formality? Stigma around living together or having kids outside marriage has largely vanished.

Financial and economic pressures
Housing affordability, high cost of living, student debt, and career instability make big life commitments feel risky. Weddings themselves are expensive (even modest ones), and many young people delay or skip marriage until (or unless) they feel financially secure. Economic insecurity also contributes to fewer people forming partnerships at all, or keeping them informal.

Later life milestones
People spend longer in education, take time to build careers (especially women, with greater workforce participation), and travel or focus on personal growth. The median age for first marriage has risen steadily (now around 30+ for both men and women). By the time they're "ready," marriage might not feel urgent — especially if kids arrive via de facto relationships.

Changing attitudes and fear of divorce
Many in this age group grew up seeing high divorce rates among their parents' generation (boomers had the peak). That creates caution: "Why risk the legal/financial mess if de facto offers similar protections?" Marriage is sometimes seen as outdated, unnecessary for commitment, or even a potential trap if things go wrong. There's also more acceptance of diverse relationship styles — single life, serial monogamy, or long-term partnering without rings.

Cultural and social shifts
Less religious influence (fewer church weddings), dating apps changing how relationships form, and a broader cultural glamorisation of independence and self-fulfilment all play roles. For some, marriage feels like conforming to expectations they don't share.

In short, it's not that your kids and their generation don't value committed relationships — many are in them, having children, building lives together — they just don't see the legal/ceremonial step as adding much value in modern Australia. 

The practical rights are largely covered without it, and the costs (financial, emotional, social) can feel high for something that's no longer seen as essential.If you're curious, a gentle, non-judgmental chat about their specific views (maybe over a beer rather than "why not marry?") might reveal more personal reasons — like "we're happy as is" or "the wedding industry is ridiculous." But yeah, the era when marriage was the automatic next step after a relationship has passed for many. It's a big social change, but families still thrive in de facto setups just fine.

ME: You don't see any connection between low marriage rates and plunging birth rates in nearly all thew world?

Yes, there is a clear and well-documented connection between declining marriage rates (or more broadly, declining rates of stable partnerships) and plunging birth rates across much of the world, including Australia. This link shows up consistently in demographic research, and it's often described as one of the strongest proximate (direct, immediate) causes of falling fertility in recent decades.

The Global Picture

Fertility rates (measured as total fertility rate, or TFR — average children per woman) have fallen dramatically worldwide since the mid-20th century, now below replacement level (2.1) in most developed countries and dropping fast in many developing ones too. Recent analyses (up to 2025 data) attribute a large portion of this decline to fewer people entering committed relationships that lead to children.

In many societies, married people have significantly higher fertility than unmarried or even cohabiting ones. Studies from the Institute for Family Studies and others show married couples are far more likely to have children (and more of them) than singles or cohabiters.

Declining marriage rates explain a substantial share of fertility drops — for example, one analysis found ~75% of the U.S. fertility decline since 2007 tied to shifts in who is married. Similar patterns appear in cross-country data, where drops in people being married or in stable couples track almost one-to-one with fewer births.

In places like East Asia (e.g., South Korea, where extramarital births are rare), falling marriage rates account for the majority (80%+) of birth rate declines over recent decades. In Western countries, where cohabitation is more common, the story includes both fewer partnerships overall and sometimes lower fertility even within cohabiting unions due to greater instability.

Other factors contribute (economic pressures, education/career priorities, housing costs, shifting norms around family), but relationship formation — especially marriage as a stable context for kids — is frequently the biggest single driver in decomposition studies.

In Australia SpecificallyAustralia mirrors this trend closely. The TFR has continued falling, hitting around 1.48 in 2024 and projected to drop further to ~1.42 in 2025–26 (well below replacement). Marriage rates have declined steadily, with fewer people marrying young or at all, while cohabitation has risen but not fully offset the drop in partnered people (especially at peak childbearing ages).

From 1991–2019 (and trends continuing), the falling proportion of partnered women (particularly married) contributed negatively to fertility, especially among younger ages. Births to married mothers dropped from ~77% to ~64%, with cohabiting births rising but not enough to compensate fully.

Increasing singlehood (neither married nor cohabiting) among women in childbearing years has directly pulled down overall fertility levels.

Even though Australian law treats long-term de facto partners similarly to married ones for many rights, cohabiting couples often have fewer children on average than married ones (due to less perceived stability or commitment), and many people delay or skip partnering altogether.

Your observation about your kids and nieces/nephews fits right in: they're in relationships (often de facto), having or planning kids, but skipping formal marriage. 

In aggregate, though, fewer people reach that stable partnered stage (or do so later), fewer have multiple kids, and overall births drop. It's not that committed relationships have vanished entirely — many still form families — but the shift away from marriage (and sometimes away from any long-term partnership) means fewer births than in past generations.

In short, yes — the connection is strong and causal in many analyses: fewer marriages/partnerships → fewer babies. It's a key part of why global birth rates are plunging, even as other explanations (like costs or individualism) play supporting roles. If policymakers want to boost fertility, addressing barriers to stable relationships often comes up as more impactful than just cash incentives for kids.
=======================

Me, adding: Fear of Climate Change. I've had this mentioned direct to me, several times. And seen it written about. The fear -- in my view unfounded -- has led many to think that it's "not fair" or "too dangerous" to bring new young life into the world. 

Tuesday, 10 February 2026

Election results 2024. (And Bad Bunny’s halftime show at the NFL)

For the record. 2024 election results by ethnicity. 

 A record 54% of Latino Men voting for Trump is — we know this from exit polls— because they are against illegal immigration, even though they know the majority of illegals are Hispanic. Reason: the illegals take Latino working-class jobs and drive down wages. Fewer illegals => pressure for higher working class wages. Latinos living legally in the U.S. like ICE. They like illegals being deported. They support all that stuff that Dems are so busy telling us is horrible.

Bad Bunny's half time NFL show was Latinos cutting sugar cane, Latinos selling tacos from street carts. Was Latinas twerking their butts and Latinas pole dancing, like Ho's. Pretty demeaning stuff. 

Bad Bunny told us all at the recent Grammy’s that he loves illegals and hates ICE. 

How do Latinos in America, the legals, the citizens, view this? The opposite, I should think. Given their voting record. 

The Bad Bunny show would have been absolutely hammered if it'd come from a white band, like Kid Rock. It’s only not condescending and demeaning, one assumes, because Bad Bunny performed it, he being Puerto Rican and all….

All the half time show was in Spanish, even Lady Gaga. Which is a movement in the U.S. — to make Spanish the official tongue.

My take on the Spanish issue: The extent to which Spanish becomes the common language in America will be the extent to which the American economy stops performing. English is the world language; the international language. The lingua Franca. The language of trade, economy, education and science. It's good to have an international language and it's good for one’s people to speak it. Not to go backwards to making us understand each other less well. 

I speak here as someone whose mother tongue was Italian, who learned French and German as a kid, and Chinese as an adult. I'm pro learning languages, Spanish included. Just not as a lingua franca. 

So what are they NFL up to? If the average fan doesn’t like Bad Bunny, and even Latinos don’t, then why? 

Adam Carolla says it’s to sell the game worldwide. The game already has its American market locked up. Now let’s go for the international Brown market. Well good luck with that, as they seem to be losing the American market, the one they appear to believe is their rusted-on core. 

We shall see.

“Trump” on various Rabbits. Bad, Good and Nasty. (Funny). 

Tuesday, 27 January 2026

Democrats used to LOOOVE Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)...


Source of pie chart: Harvard/Harris poll
This is truly insane!

1. No one rioted about prior administrations' deportations.

2. Hundreds of thousands of the illegal immigrants arrested by ICE have criminal convictions in the US (74% of the public supports deporting them).

3. None of this would be necessary if the border hadn't been wide open. (See below).

Regardless of how you feel about ICE, you can logically admit that this is a masterclass in propaganda The legacy media has focused entirely on ICE, rather than four years of a totally open border; or on the insanity of "Sanctuary" policies in Blue administrations. Which strike me as being against the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, though that discussion is for another day. 

**************

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama... All of them thought that illegal immigrants should be deported. Obama was known -- fondly! -- as the "Deporter-in-Chief":

These are direct quotes. Taken from confirmed videos 
of each of these saying these things, repeatedly over the years
All of the fuss and drama and injuries and deaths, happening mainly in Minnesota, but increasingly in other Blue States, are the direct result of Joe Biden letting in millions of immigrants, undocumented (aka: "Illegal"), without any vetting of who they were, where they were from, what sort of criminal history they had. 

Shame on Biden and his enabler-in-chief, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who, by the way, consistently lied about the huge numbers swarming over the border. 

Just look at that chart! What Biden did, while all the time denying it... 

And shame today on the citizens of Blue cities -- principal among them Minneapolis -- making ICE the Bad Guys. Harrassing them. Attacking them. Spitting on them. Calling them the gestapo. They are the ones causing chaos; not Trump who is merely trying to carry out a promise he made consistently on the campaign trail. They are the ones that are getting people killed by interfering with lawful activities of law enforcement officers.  

One could argue, either Dem or Rep, along the lines of "we agree that there should be deporations, but not like this!". They don't like the look of the ways it's being done. But that's only that way in the cities that are resisting ICE activities. In the Red States, where there no "Sancturies", the process is safe and straight forward. It's only because these Blue "Sanctuaries" are resisting every action of ICE that we have the troubles. Which the Left then labels as "chaos". It's only chaos because of them!

ICE are just trying to carry out lawful activity. An activity that Democrats in the past were keen to do. Democrates are OG Hypocrites. 

Crime rates amongst Illegals is at about twice the rate of US citizens:
Illegals or "Undocumented" immigrants in the United States are about 3% of the population, but commit about 6% of the violent crimes. 

This puts paid to the Democrat talking point that "undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes than ordinary Americans". First: not true. Second: even if it were, so what? They are crimes that would not have been committed had they not been in the country illegally in the first place.

Hat-tip to Arthur MacWaters, ex of Princeton and McKinsey.

Friday, 16 January 2026

Italy -- Georgia Meloni -- stands up for western values. Yay!

Dr Steve Turley, above, on important developments in Italy. 

Georgia Meloni, PM of Italy, draws the line. We are Europe -- she says -- and we have our values. If you want to come here, you must adhere to those values, not those of your medieval ideology. 

Is it fair? You bet! And long overdue. Just look at Iran. Why are the people there uprising? Because they hate the ideology that they've been oppressed by since 1979. Where ex-Muslims are revolting, as Harris Sultan shows. Just the latest of 8 uprisings. Where over 12,000 have already been slaughtered by the regime. 

I do hope Trump does a Venezuela on it. (even though, as I write, he's toning down his tough talk. Don't go soft on us now, Donald!).

Italy -- Georgia Meloni -- is just trying NOT to be the next Iran. Trying NOT to be swallowed by fascistic Islamic ideology. 

Islam is most clearly a wicked ideology. 

It is an idology that is supremacist, homophobic, misogynist, racist, anti free speech, anti non-Muslims. Also: anti-drink, anti-music, anti-dance, anti-films, anti-women's hair. Pretty much anti everything that makes life worth living. (and that does include women's hair...).

You could argue people who adhere to this ideology should not even be allowed into our western countries. Or allowed into liberal Asia: Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Korea. I would argue that. I would happily take that side of a debate. 

But if you can't bring yourself to that level of discrimination, then at the very least we must follow the lead of cara Georgia. To say to these guests in our countries: 

"Very well, if you insist on moving to our countries, we expect that you follow our de-minimis demands. Do not insist on your own public oppressions. Oppressions of your women and ours. Oppressions of our rights to enjoy drink and music. Do not insist that your women dress in bags and cover their faces. Do not insist that we close our pubs. Do not insist that we follow Halal dietary cruelty. Do not insist we follow your Ramadan fasts. Do not insist that areas you've colonized are no-go 'Sharia Zones'.

"We're done. We will not stand for it."

Imagine. Italy being Roman! If you had to choose between living under the Roman Empire of the Islamic Caliphate, which would you choose? For me it's easy. It's Rome every time. Rome, aka the West, wins every time. 

It's too much to expect that what Georgia Meloni is doing will win out against the European Blob. The Blog of Angela von der Leyen. Or the Blobs of Macron and Merz. Or the Blob of Keir der Sturmer's Islamic Britain. Which are in thrall to the idea that the west is Bad and Islam is Good. Who are even more in thrall to the idea that the dollars flowing from Islamic regimes to the west are wery wery welcome. 

But still one can hope. It's Georgia, cara Georgia, who's given us that hope.

Auguri Georgia!  Auguri Bella!

ADDED

I thought Iran was majority Shia Muslim. Turns out that it's majority "Atheist, Agnostic or None", a total of 37%. That's the plurality, vs Shia Muslim at just 32%. The ancient traditional Persian religion of Zoroastrianism still has 7%, more than I'd've thought. (If you'd've asked me). 

Stats for 2020. I'll bet Iran's become even less Shia since then

Wednesday, 14 January 2026

Vale Scott Adams

Scott Adams died on January 13, at the age of 68. 

I first came across Scott Adams when he had an interview with Sam Harris. The theme was Trump, and the fact that Scott had been one of the very few to predict a Trump win in 2016, mainly on the basis of his view that Trump was using classic persuasion techniques. 

Over the years I've watched his morning shows, Coffee with Scott Adams, with some regularity. I found him a unique mind. Often I didn't agree with his views, but if I didn't, I had to think hard to work out why. For much else, I was either persuaded or agreed with him. The one thing about him that really got on my goat was that he was a very defensive character and if people criticised him, he got very tetchy. 

These are what I think will be my lasting memories of his "teachings" (as he called them):

One movie two, screens. How we can see the same thing, but have very different readings of it. See, eg, the recent ICE shooting of a young woman protester, which has plenty of video. The Dems say it was "murder". The Reps say it was "self defence". 

Framing: how you frame something can have a big effect. He framed drinking alcohol as being drinking poison. That's pretty strong stuff!

Talent Stacks: work at adding each talent you have to the stack of existing talents, until you become a unique talent stack, useful to many employers. 

Systems over goals. This is one of the best one of his teachings. It's important. It seems to me that the Dems in America are all about Goals, which they see as being important and makes them feel good; and Reps, who are all about Systems, that making something better is the better way to go, rather than reaching for the impossible goal. 

I'll quote from the Grokipedia article on Systems over Goals: 

In his 2013 book How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big: Kind of the Story of My Life, Scott Adams introduced the systems versus goals framework as a core element of his personal success philosophy, arguing that pursuing repeatable processes yields better long-term outcomes than fixating on discrete targets.[59][60] Adams summarizes that goals put individuals in a state of "nearly continuous failure" until achieved, while systems let one "succeed every time [they apply them]."[61] He defines a goal as a specific, future-oriented objective—such as losing 20 pounds or running a marathon—that often fosters discouragement and dependency on willpower.[61] In contrast, a system comprises habitual actions performed regularly, like maintaining a healthy diet or exercising daily, which generate incremental progress and daily satisfaction regardless of ultimate attainment.[62][59]

Adams attributes his own career achievements, including the syndication of Dilbert in 1989, to systems-oriented habits such as consistent content creation and skill-building rather than rigid milestones.[60] He posits that systems enhance probability of success by compounding small wins and adapting to setbacks, whereas goals risk demotivation upon non-achievement or complacency post-success, citing observational evidence from high achievers who prioritize routines over endpoints.[59][62] For instance, in career advancement, a goal might be "get promoted to manager," inducing anxiety during the interim, while a system of networking daily and upskilling continuously builds momentum and opportunities organically.[60]

The framework extends to broader life domains, including fitness and business, where Adams claims systems reduce reliance on fleeting motivation and align with human psychology's preference for immediate reinforcement.[59] He illustrates this with dieting: a weight-loss goal creates binary failure until met, but an "eat right" system succeeds with each compliant meal, sustaining adherence over time.[61] Adams has reiterated this concept in subsequent writings and podcasts, positioning it as a tool for probabilistic success in uncertain environments, though he acknowledges it complements rather than replaces all forms of planning.

Grok: Scott Adams

Greg Gutfeld: "Scott Adams was a MONUMENTAL person". Scott Adams, a non-traditional thinker. 

Adam Carolla: “Scott Adams was an interesting, intelligent, successful man” who made people think outside the bounds.

Carl Benjamin: “The media is terrible about the death of Scott Adams”. 

The allegedly “racist” thing that Scott said was in 2023 when he commented on a Rasmussen poll showing 52% of Blacks in America thought “it’s not OK to be White”. A commenter on Akkad notes: “[Scott’s] ‘controversial’ take was that we have no obligation to associate with people who hold open and explicit disdain for us based on skin colour”.  

Scott was interviewed a lot after this issue. But always by Black podcasters and bloggers, all of whom in one way or another agreed with him. Not a single one of the legacy media interviewed him.


Thursday, 1 January 2026

What's the Truth? How do you find it? (Spoiler: Rigorous Inquiry)

"How do you know what the Truth is?" asks a guest at our Boxing Day Recovery Buffett. 

"Good question," I answer. 

Before launching into a confusing, half-baked answer to her question. Where I got lost in a tangle of brambles and a wilderness of weeds, about my time as an intelligence analyst in the Australian government, back in the 1980s. Where I had to make judgements about which incoming Intelligence info should be passed on up the chain -- all the way to the Prime Minister -- and which should be binned in the Classified Trash. I mean, kind of relevant to the question, but also kind of roundabout and incoherent. 

Recovered the next morning, I sent her a text saying again "good question", and that I'd not really answered it well. I wanted to add some factors. Like: 

1.  Primary Sources: Make sure you look at, delve into, Primary Sources. And.. 

2.  Many Sources: Look at the media from Left to Right; where there's intersection is more likely to be truth. As I covered years ago, here. (See the Venn Diagram at top). 

I should have added some more. Like: 

3. Read past the Headline. I've been surprised, but now no longer, at just how many friends and rellies will happily admit to reading only the headline of an article. I had one tell me, proudly!: "I only read the headlines from the Guardian". I mean: not that you'll always get nonsense by reading only the Guardian, but for sure you'll always get only one side, the far Left side, of a story. And one of the things about seeking the Truth is that it's rarely a monopoly of just one side of an argument. If you read past the headlines, there's often times when the contents of a story itself will reverse what the headline says. 

4. Social Media: We have to rely on it, at least for some of our news and for some of our Truth-seeking. But the biases are very different across the range. Reddit is way more slanted to the Dems than is YouTube, for example. The most balanced, by Pew Research results, is X, the Twitter platform that Elon Musk bought and made Free Speech its guiding light:

The most skewed is Bluesky, the X equivalent on the Left

A good topic for the first day of the New Year, is it not? How do we know what The Truth is? So therefore...

I asked my AI about this Truth business. The first two items it mentioned were exactly those I texted the Boxing Day questioner above: Primary Sources. And Many Sources. 

Here's the rest of AI's answer to my question "How can we tell the Truth about Event X?"

When two people hold conflicting views on "Event X", determining the truth requires systematic critical thinking rather than accepting one side outright.

Start by seeking primary evidence: original documents, videos, eyewitness accounts, or data directly related to X. 

Avoid relying solely on interpretations.Consult diverse, credible sources representing all perspectives—reputable news outlets, academic studies, fact-checking sites (e.g., FactCheck.org, PolitiFact, Snopes), and expert analyses. 

Look for consensus among independent verifiers; agreement across biases strengthens reliability.

Evaluate sources for credibility: Check author expertise, potential biases, and whether claims are supported by verifiable evidence, not just opinions or anecdotes.

Identify logical fallacies, emotional appeals, or selective framing in arguments. Ask: What evidence would falsify each view? Be open to updating your beliefs.

Truth about events is often probabilistic, not absolute—aim for the most justified conclusion based on available evidence. 

Recognize personal biases may cloud judgment; steelman opposing views to test them fairly.

Absolute certainty is rare, but rigorous inquiry gets closest to reality.

And there, ladies and gentlemen, we have our first and very serious, New Year's Resolution: Let us commit to "Rigorous Inquiry"!

Wednesday, 15 October 2025

"Is Trump’s America at the start of a Soviet-style downfall?" | Zheng Yongnian

You know who I'm not going to take advice from? Whose analysis I'm not going to take without a bucketload of salt? 

A Chinese academic.  

Zheng Yongnian, a Chinese academic, here at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, my alma mater. An academic who is adviser to the Chinese government. 

That's who I'm NOT going to listen to carefully. 

Just as I don't listen carefully to academics in the American academy. I mean, I’ll read them, sure. Gotta see what they’re saying. Their world view. But reality? 

Academics are usually (by all available stats and polls) badly infected with the Woke mind virus. Too often having spent a whole life in academia, with zero outside experience. There’s nothing like having to meet a payroll to give you perspective on Real Life.

I'll have more to say about Zhang’s piece, in due course. Truth and Facts! 

Meantime I'm  just bookmarking Zheng’s piece in the South China Morning Post.  A piece that was given pride of place. That has a boatload of comments, all of them anti-America. 

PS: Academics I do have time for: Thomas Sowell, John McWhorter, Niall Ferguson, Coleman Hughes, Victor Davis Hanson and even the liberal Larry Summers. Why them? In part because they don't go with the flow. And having the mind of one's own to not go with the flow, shows independence of thought. Thomas Sowell used to be a Marxist. He was asked "What changed your mind?" and his answer: "Reality". 

Monday, 11 August 2025

"I will debunk ANY Pro-Palestinian video (starting with: the war didn’t start on October 7th)" | Oren Cahanovitc

 

A tiny fact-check on a figure Oren Cahanovitc quotes. The number of Arabs living as citizens of Israel, a total of 22% of the Israeli population, who way they would rather live in Israel than an Arab state, is according to various polls, between 60% and 93%. That's still a healthy number, but not the 99% Oren mentions. 

Ok, I'm quibbling. 

I like this video because not only debunks the errors of the egregious Max Blumenthal -- who drips with jew-hatred and Israel hatred, and he a Jew... --  but also what the even more horrid Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, said immediately after the October 7th massacre: "There's context to this". Meaning the same thing as Blumenthal is referring to -- a war in 1948 at the time of the establishment of the State of Israel. All of which Oren tears apart in his video above. 

It's also a common trope amongst the Hamas-nicks -- "it didn't start on October 7th!" -- from the luvvies who march along to support the Horrid Hamas, in their kewl keffiyehs, their Black Flags of ISIS, who march across the Harbour Bridge in support of genocidal barbarians, these ones who think they know a little bit. And of course, do end up knowing just a little bit and a little bit of knowledge is always dangerous. 

Monday, 23 June 2025

Operation "Midnight Hammer" -- Yay!! 👍👍👍

Thunderbird pilot gives his take
Cool Op name. Cool planes. Cool outcome. 

Banging the hell out of nuclear facilities in Iran. 

Most Americans are on side -- by something like 70/30. Some are not on side, but are very loud. The "Horseshoe Coalition": of the "progressive" Lefties, Bernie, AOC, the Squad; and the kooky Righties, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Steve Bannon

To the booh-hoo whining and crying brigade, to all you Horseshoe Brigade: you can only not be welcoming and exulting in this strike because:

You don't mind that the world's largest promoter of terrorism is about to get the Bomb. 

You don't mind that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps say they'll use the Bomb to annihilate all Jews and to attack Europe, starting with Rome first. 

You don't mind that they jail, beat, rape and kill women for not wearing the hijab. That they don't allow women to travel without a male chaperone. 

You don't mind that they hang gays from mobile cranes in the town square. That those they don't hang, they forcibly castrate. 

You don't mind that they fervently believe that their time on this earth is to foment Islamic Jihadist terrorist overthrow to overthrow the west. 

You don't mind that they've spent all their oil revenues to establish and support proxies to commit murder and mayhem in their name, in the Middle East and the west.  

You don't mind any of that, all you whiners and moaners, all of you Hamas-nicks, all of you "impeach-Trump-nicks" . All you mind is that it's Trump that's doing it, and being against Trump trumps all else. 

That's what you don't care about -- you, Bernie Sanders and AOC, neither of you who has ever had a proper job, or you, Tucker Carlson, you Candace Owens, you Steve Bannon -- none of you care one jot about any of that. You cry "Peace" from the rafters, as if saying "peace" brings peace. It sure makes you feel virtuous. 

Revolting. Zero morals. Moral vacuity. 

I find it easy, super easy, to welcome, to exult, to congratulate, to revel, in the huge win for the American attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, in support of the equally easy to support Israeli Operation Rising Lion. 

Against what is turning out to be the Paper Tiger of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. 

As we await, with hope, the rising of the Iranian people against their tyrant. Who we know from all polls they do not like, they do not support -- by something like 80% against

Wednesday, 18 June 2025

Israel's world-changing inventions

Prompted by the fascinating discussion between US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee and Dave Rubin, recently posted. The ambassador talked about how much Israel had given to the US. Here's some more:
  • Drip Irrigation - A water-saving system for crops, developed by Simcha Blass in the 1960s.
  • PillCam - A swallowable camera for diagnosing digestive issues, invented by Given Imaging.
  • USB Flash Drive - Portable data storage, invented by Dov Moran and M-Systems in 1999.
  • Waze - A GPS navigation app with real-time traffic updates, created by Ehud Shabtai.
  • Iron Dome - A missile defense system, developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems.
  • ICQ - The first widely used instant messaging service, created by Mirabilis in 1996.
  • Mobileye - Autonomous driving and car safety technology, founded by Amnon Shashua.
  • ReWalk - A robotic exoskeleton for paraplegics, invented by Amit Goffer.
  • Firewall Technology - The first commercial firewall, developed by Check Point Software in 1993.
  • Cherry Tomato - A smaller, sweeter tomato variety, bred by Hebrew University researchers.
And, iPhone related: 
  • Face ID Technology - The facial recognition system used in iPhones, based on 3D sensor technology from PrimeSense, acquired by Apple in 2013 for $350 million, and RealFace, acquired in 2017.
  • Flash Storage Controllers - Anobit Technologies, acquired by Apple in 2012 for $390 million, developed high-performance controllers to optimize memory in iPhones and iPads.
  • Apple Silicon Chips - Key components of Apple’s M2 and R1 chips, used in iPhones and other devices, were developed by Apple’s R&D center in Israel, which employs over 2,500 people.
  • Camera Enhancements - Low-light mode and other camera technologies in iPhones were partially developed by Apple’s Israel R&D team, leveraging expertise in computer vision.
  • Motion Sensors and AR Tools - PrimeSense’s 3D sensing technology, acquired by Apple, contributed to augmented reality features and motion sensors in iPhones.
And one that hits home: Stents for the heart. I have 9 of them (!), InStents, in the surrounding veins and arteries to my heart. I owe my life to them. To Israeli Jews, IOW.

  • Stents:
    Israel has been a major innovator in medical stents, particularly coronary stents used to treat blocked arteries.
    • InStent: Founded in Israel in 1990, InStent developed early coronary stents, including the Palmaz-Schatz stent, a pioneering balloon-expandable stent. It was acquired by Medtronic in 1998 for $200 million.
    • Medinol: Established in 1992 by Dr. Jacob (Kobi) Richter, Medinol created the NIR stent, known for its flexibility and strength, widely used in cardiology. Medinol remains a global leader in stent technology, partnering with companies like Boston Scientific.
    • InspireMD: This Israeli company developed the MGuard stent, which includes a mesh sleeve to trap debris during procedures, reducing complications. It’s used in heart attack treatments.
      Israel’s stent innovations have significantly advanced minimally invasive heart treatments, with companies like Medinol continuing to drive global advancements.
    Consider: Israel, this tiny, tiny country, just ten million people, has the third largest number of companies listed on the tech-heavy Nasdaq index, after the United States and China. 

    But to the anti-semites in Australia, the US, Europe, they're "just Jews, doing what Jews do, cause trouble in the world". I despise them for their ignorant hatred. "Them", sadly, including old, old friends. Schoolmates going back sixty years. Turned by the media, or their innate, till-now-hidden,Jew hatred. The world's oldest bigotry. They have it, most of the west, and all of the Islamic world. They're infected.

    As I despise, I despair.
    Attitudes to Jew. March 2025. Pew Poll