“White Georgia State Trooper Charged With Murder For Shooting Unarmed Black Motorist”

All pretty… black-and-white, isn’t it?

Here’s another headline in the same MSN tabloid:

“Police: At least 18 shot, with 4 dead, across Cincinnati”

There is no mention that both the victims and the perps are (most likely) black.

“In July, the Enquirer reported that the city had experienced a rise in shootings and homicides from gun violence during the first half of the year as compared to the same time period in 2019,” the article goes on.

Is it not obvious that this is the result of FLOYD-19?

The more “diverse” American corporations are required to be, or require themselves to be, the less efficient they become, since diversity is a code word for incompetents demanding to be hired.

And the less, therefore, competitive, as compared with the Chinese firms, for example, they end up.

As long as some form of market economy prevails, the aims of the diversity movement are hopeless. Companies still must compete among themselves and with foreign firms and hence worry about the bottom line.

Perhaps blacks support socialism, to the extent they even understand what that is, because this is their only hope to be equal to whites in wealth and income.

Our capitalist economy is an illusion which can be dispelled by the President ordering the Fed to buy $1 googol worth of government bonds and using that new money to buy up every private company in the country.

Voila! Instant socialism.

I hope it is evident to all now that blacks must be ruled with an iron fist and repressed without mercy, lest in their savagery they become enemies to all other races and nations.

One means to general happiness, Yeager writes, is “social cooperation, which means a well-functioning society — the whole complex of institutions, practices, and precepts whereby people can interact peacefully and to mutual advantage.”

Do you think the blacks who are looting Chicago right now care about this sort of thing?

You know how in Matrix, agent Smith calls humans a virus?

I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species… and I realized that you’re not actually mammals.

Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area.

There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus.

This is obviously false for capitalism, since everyone has an incentive to take good long-term care of his own private property, but is remarkably accurate for communism. Yeager points out, for example:

Each of several farmers grazing their herds on a communal pasture finds it in his individual interest to add another cow, yet the overgrazing that results may be to everyone’s disadvantage.

The tragedy of the commons, such as for example of oceans which are unowned and have therefore devolved into a common garbage dump, as well as are suffering from overfishing, indeed turns men into a pestilence.

Mill on whether happiness is a good:

… that each person’s happiness is a good to that person, and the general happiness, therefore, a good to the aggregate of all persons.

That seems like a gross composition fallacy: a person indeed seeks his own happiness, but the “aggregate of all persons” is not itself a person and does not seek anything.

One does not demand that fish swim and birds fly: they already do this by their inner nature. Similarly, it is superfluous to command a man to pursue his own happiness: he cannot help doing just that.

But the argument “man does seek his own happiness; therefore, he ought to seek general happiness” is just a non-sequitur.

The “Zeitgeist Movement,” some sort of non-Marxist technocratic communists, but still dumb as doorknobs.

Get a load of this: in their system, there will be “No Property Crime: In a world of access rather than ownership, and without money, there is no incentive to steal, for there is no resale value.”

They don’t quite realize that there will be no goods to steal, either.

Pleasure in itself felt by the will (as joy) or by the senses (as delight) has no “quality,” only quantity. Though of course Bentham enumerated various properties of pleasure, they fall short of quality.

Quality, such as of poetry being complex or imaginative, or of pushpin being crude, is apprehended rather by the intellect.

Moore made a pertinent point, following Plato, that a man content with pleasure alone would be fine with the life of an oyster enjoying the ocean waves gently caressing it, though with no consciousness of what it is that it’s enjoying.