Jonathan Franzen is a critically acclaimed author who sparked controversy in 2001 after being kicked out of Oprah’s book club after a series of ungrateful and arrogant comments. After a series of apologies, he was finally welcomed back in 2011.
Section 1: Background
In 1996, The Oprah Winfrey Show launched a book club in which every few months or so, Oprah would pick a novel and tell her millions of viewers to read it. Then a few lucky readers would be chosen to have a televised dinner with Oprah and the author. The club immediately became the most influential force in American literature for its unparalleled ability to turn obscure authors into #1 best-sellers overnight. In a daytime television landscape filled with tabloid trash and celebrity interviews, Oprah was praised for bringing literature to the masses and even won the national book award for her literary advocacy. Being picked for Oprah’s book club was widely seen as the greatest thing that could happen to an author because it meant orders of magnitude more money and readers.
For Oprah, the club was pure marketing genius. She was getting credit for making the masses more literate while at the same time, building her status as Queen of All Media, and distancing herself from her trashy daytime competitors.
Oprah had brilliantly become one of the rare people in America to achieve three major types of clout at the highest level: money, popularity, and with her book club, intellectual influence.
But not everyone was a fan of Oprah’s book club.
Section 2: Picking The Corrections
In the Fall of 2001, Oprah selected Jonathan Franzen’s critically acclaimed novel The Corrections for her book club, phoning the author to tell him the characters in the book stayed with her for months. Unlike most people who get a surprise phone call from Oprah, Franzen did not jump and scream with excitement: the first sign there would be trouble. Because one reviewer had praised The Corrections as too edgy to ever be an Oprah pick, and because Franzen’s book was already a critically acclaimed best seller, from the outset Franzen felt conflicted about being knighted by Oprah, at one point ungratefully suggesting that it does as much for her as it does for him.
Section 3: A hard book for “that audience”
But because no one in their right mind says “no” to Oprah, at least not in North America, Franzen agreed to be part of the book club and even allowed himself to be filmed for an upcoming show, though he was annoyed that Oprah’s producers wanted to film him at his Midwestern childhood home, not his adult New York environment.
When constantly baited in interviews on his book tour, Franzen expressed discomfort with becoming an Oprah author, telling David Weich of powells.com:
The problem in this case is some of Oprah’s picks. She’s picked some good books, but she’s picked enough schmaltzy, one-dimensional ones that I cringe, myself, even though I think she’s really smart and she’s really fighting the good fight. And she’s an easy target.
It’s somewhat perceptive of Franzen to see through Oprah’s populist persona and realize she’s “really smart”, despite cringing at some of her book choices, despite claiming to have virtually never watched her show, and despite being unaware of my obscure research on her cranial capacity. Perhaps his cynicism caused him to understand the marketing genius behind her book club, or perhaps the mere fact that she loved his book was enough to be considered “really smart”.
Because apparently Franzen felt a lot of people were not smart enough to enjoy his work, at one point stating:
First and foremost, it’s a literary book. And I think it’s an accessible literary book. It’s an open question how big the audience is to which it will be accessible, and I think beyond the limits of that audience, there’s going to be a lot of, “What was Oprah thinking?” kind of responses. They, themselves, over there at “The Oprah Show”, they have no idea how they’re going to arrange the show because they’ve never done a book like this and they’re waiting to hear from their readers.
Even more disturbing, Franzen condescendingly said in the Philadelphia Inquirer that The Corrections is a “hard book for that audience”.
Section 4: The IQ of Corrections fans
It’s interesting to ask how high an IQ one needs to enjoy The Corrections? I happen to know two big fans of the book so well I was able to test them: One has an IQ of about 110 and the other has an IQ of about 130. Assuming this tiny sample is representative, I would say the average Corrections fan has an IQ of about 120 (U.S. norms): smarter than 90% of America.
Section 5: The IQ of Oprah fans
The IQ of Oprah fans is not known, but if education level is used as a crude proxy, the average viewer of Oprah’s syndicated talk show had an IQ almost exactly at the U.S. mean of 100 and the average Oprah magazine reader has an IQ 112 (U.S. norms). The magazine readers are probably a good proxy for Oprah Book Club fans, and they’re only about half a standard deviation below Correction fans; suggesting considerable overlap between the bell curves of both populations; perhaps about 27% of Oprah book club fans are smarter than the average Corrections fan.
Section 6: Hoping for a male audience
Another reason Franzen was ungrateful to be an Oprah pick was that he feared it would alienate his target audience. Franzen told NPR’s Terry Gross:
So much of reading is sustained in this country, I think, by the fact that women read while men are off golfing or watching football on TV or playing with their flight simulator or whatever. I worry — I’m sorry that it’s, uh — I had some hope of actually reaching a male audience and I’ve heard more than one reader in signing lines now at bookstores say ‘If I hadn’t heard you, I would have been put off by the fact that it is an Oprah pick. I figure those books are for women. I would never touch it.’ Those are male readers speaking.
Section 7: Logo of corporate ownership
Perhaps what bothered Franzen most was the Oprah logo that his publishers were placing on the book’s cover, as Franzen explained:
I see this as my book, my creation, and I didn’t want that logo of corporate ownership on it. It’s not a sticker, it’s part of the cover. They redo the whole cover. You can’t take it off. I know it says Oprah’s Book Club but it’s an implied endorsement, both for me and for her. The reason I got in this business is because I’m an independent writer, and I didn’t want a corporate logo on my book.
Section 8: The backlash
Little did Franzen know, that Oprah herself was informed of these comments, and she wasn’t amused. In October 2001, Oprah released a statement saying:
Jonathan Franzen will not be on the show because he is seemingly uncomfortable and conflicted about being chosen as a book club selection. It is never my intention to make anyone uncomfortable or cause anyone conflict. We have decided to skip the dinner and we’re moving on to the next book.
The sheer POWER of Oprah was such that with one brief statement, public opinion turned immediately against Franzen, as he went from America’s greatest author to America’s biggest snob, overnight.
“What an ungrateful bastard,” said one major New York literary agent. “Even if he did have misgivings, he should have just accepted the selection graciously and said nothing. After all, no one in America has helped sell more books than Oprah.”
Author Andre Dubus III stated:
It is so elitist it offends me deeply. The assumption that high art is not for the masses, that they won’t understand it and they don’t deserve it — I find that reprehensible. Is that a judgment on the audience? Or on the books in whose company his would be?
Critic Dennis Loy Johnson wrote:
Well, let’s see, how many different people does that offend? Men are too stupid to read but Franzen prefers them to women readers, especially, apparently, those that watch Oprah. Is it misogyny, do you think, or class prejudice, or worse?
It was the “or worse?” that dangled so hauntingly from the end of the sentence.
Prominent publications would slam Franzen for being a “motherfucker”, an “ego-blinded snob” and a “spoiled, whiny little brat”.
In the publishing industry he was commonly referred to behind his back as that “pompous prick”.
Franzen would write a letter apologizing to Oprah, but would not hear back.
For ten long years, Oprah didn’t even bother to comment. Was she angry, hurt, or simply didn’t care? No one knew, because for an entire decade, the richest and most worshipped self-made woman on the planet stood in dignified decisive silence.
Perhaps Franzen had hoped that by dissing Oprah, he would be a hero to the cultural elites that so resented her power, but by evicting Franzen from her book club, the cunning Queen of All Media gained sympathy for being the victim of snobbery, and cheers for kicking an ungrateful elitist off her show. Despite the fact that Billionaire Oprah is roughly a thousand times richer than Millionaire Franzen, she was the populist hero while Franzen was the elite villain.
One might argue that this shows Franzen’s lack of intelligence, or at least social intelligence, but such a view would be short-sighted. For the controversy increased book sales and exposed him to a much larger audience, and as the years passed, and Oprah became seen as more of an elite herself, the whole ugly episode would serve to cement Franzen’s status as a literary rebel, too sophisticated for mass market consumption. And while he continues to be seen in some circles as a pretentious sexist snob, he appeared on the cover of Time magazine, was invited to meet Obama, and even Oprah finally had him on her show to formally burry the hatchet.
Section 9: When geek is sheek, Franzen’s high IQ fashion statement and the rise of the hipsters
Franzen’s IQ is interesting because rarely do you see someone so self-consciously intellectual. And although Franzen claims to hate hipsters, he pretty much was one. As one critic observed:
Right down to the wardrobe–thick-rimmed geek glasses and tweed jackets abound–Franzen really wants to be one of these guys, among them someday read by bluestockings and PhD candidates. And he seems, like DeLillo and Pynchon, to want to comment on society, to try to capture its ethos in print, but otherwise keep his hands clean of pop culture.
Chicago Tribune columnist Mary Schmich observed:
Maybe you’ve even run across Franzen’s official photo during his burst of fame. He’s a handsome guy. He looks like he might show up in one of those high-art fashion ads that wants you to believe that the brooding, cleft-chinned model is a Harvard grad student because who else would wear such earnest glasses and not have time to shave?
Franzen’s hipster image further symbolizes his conflict with Oprah. You see a lot of hipsters who look like Franzen working at Chapters book store or working as baristas in the affiliated Starbucks where Chapters customers order coffee. These used to role their eyes at the army of unhip middle aged housewives marching into the store demanding the latest Oprah selection. Freud might say Franzen’s trapped in permanent adolescence, still rebelling against his Midwestern mother who might have resembled the typical Oprah fan.
Indeed Franzen has stated that as a teenager, when his father would go away, he would then become the man of the house, eating dinner with his mother in place of his father: the substitute husband. This made the young Franzen very uncomfortable.
Section 10: Subjective impressions of Franzen’s IQ
In a review of Franzen’s latest book Purity, Sean Kinch writes:
Critics who find Franzen’s work too cerebral will bridle at the long passages in Purity concerning the Internet, art, economics, and so forth. Reviewing The Corrections, Norman Mailer said that Franzen “may well have the highest IQ of any American novelist writing today” but, “like a polymath, he lives much of the time in Wonkville Hollow.” Franzen does indeed stuff his novels with arcane information, often reeled off at rates of speed that prohibit first-reading comprehension, but Mailer’s criticism misses what makes works like Purity engaging. Franzen enthusiasts appreciate a writer who depicts educated, professional adults in all their complexity, which includes their intellectual conflicts and the pressures of their white-collar occupations. Purity will reinforce the author’s reputation for tackling esoteric topics, but he never loses sight of the messy, fleshy humans who bring them to life.
The average creative writer at the elite Iowa Writers’ Workshop has an IQ of 120, so if we assume working novelists also average 120 with a standard deviation of say 14 (Compared to the U.S. mean and SD of 100 and 15 respectively), and if Franzen has the highest IQ of the some 19,000 working novelists in America (as Mailer implied), that would put his IQ at an astonishing 174! (one in 2.4 million level)
While Franzen is definitely very bright, this figure sounds ludicrously high.
Section 11: Statistically expected IQ of a literary Genius
Franzen is probably considered one of the five most accomplished writers in America, out of some 200 million American adults. If there were a perfect correlation between IQ and writing skill, this would imply an IQ of 182 (82 points above the U.S. mean), but according to a study reported in the WAIS-IV (intelligence test) technical manual, the written expression subtest of the WIAT-II (achievement test) correlates 0.6 with WAIS-IV Full-Scale IQ. However because the written expression subtest is just one brief subtest, correcting for its unreliability would raise the correlation to 0.7. Given this 0.7 correlation between IQ and writing talent, we should regress to Franzen’s likely IQ to only 70% as far above the mean and thus 157.
However great achievement requires more than just raw talent. It also helps to have 10,000 hours of practice, among other things. Raw talent seems to explain 66% to 70% of the variance in expert level performance, suggesting talent correlates 0.82 with performance. Thus we need to regress Franzen again to only 82% as far above the mean, which brings his expected IQ to 147 (U.S. norms).
But this is just a crude statistical prediction with a sizeable standard of error. Is there any evidence to support it?
Section 12: No more guessing games, actual psychometric data
The closest thing we have to an actual IQ test for Franzen is his appearance on Celebrity Jeopardy. Although Franzen lost to cable commenter S.E. Cupp, that was only because he bet too much on Final Jeopardy. Before the final bet, Franzen had $14,800, Cupp had $13,200 and TV journalist Chuck Todd had $12,200. Thus, the three of them had a mean pre-final score of $13,400, with a standard deviation of $1,300 (adjusted for degrees of freedom given the small sample). So Franzen was 1.08 standard deviations above the mean Jeopardy ability of Celebrity Jeopardy power players . However in order to convert this to an IQ equivalent, we need to know the IQ distribution of said players.
Given that all the power players that night were either talking heads (average IQ 127) or novelists (average IQ 120), a rough guess is that they have a mean IQ around 125 with a standard deviation of 15 (same as the U.S. SD since they come from a range of occupations).
Thus, Franzen being 1.08 SD above this mean equates to an IQ of:
1.08(15) + 127 = 143
This is very close to the IQ 147 that we’d statistically expect from a literary Genius (see section 11). Both are in the mid 140s.
Of course this score should be treated with great caution because it is based on only one fairly luck dependent measure of cognition (Jeopardy performance), the sample size against which Franzen was compared was tiny (three people and was skewed by the fact that Franzen himself was one of the three!)
Nonetheless an IQ of 143 (U.S. norms)(142 U.S. white norms) is very believable. Only one in several hundred Americans is this smart. Incredibly high enough to explain his literary genius and hyper-intellectualism, yet low enough to explain why he was forced to change his major in college from Physics to German because, as he told CBC Radio, he didn’t have either “the talent or patience for high level math”.
Pumpkin Person 
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/aug/01/freddy-adu-polish-club-tryout-sandecja-manager
Shocking decline.
I remember when I used to be religious about football reading about this guy being the next pele. It appears he was a flash in the pan.
But still amazing to read how his career was so horrible.
See all that money the rich foreignors pay to own property alongside nice high empathy english people in london.
I would say the english are much closer to the germans and dutch than scottish and irish in temperment.
Historically the most welcoming to the jews as well (and you can make an argument that the symbiosis helped them ‘rule the waves’ as Niall Ferguson implicitly does)
I would suggest most british council estate proles have substantial celt ancestry much like the hillbillies in America.
(whisper) Warrior genes muhammed. Warrior genes.
I got some of them Celtic warrior genes. Combine them with black genes and it’s no wonder I feel so many violent urges.
When I remember London I remember the peacock gym where the world heavyweight boxing champion used to workout. Its a piece of crap gym with lots of blacks and working class types. Nitty gritty. Nitty gritty. A lto of the guys have obvious brain damage from boxing.
I had a membership with that banker gym, Reebok in Canary Wharf for a while as well.
I think I can pull girls from gyms at will no matter the social class. I remember the polish receptionist in reebok couldnt speak properly around me and would ignore people saying hi to her when I was dealing with her about admin. Keep in mind the creme de la upper class uses that gym.
I get very intense stares from women in gyms, and I’m not the biggest guy in the world.
You need to be muscular enough though. The best way the gym improves your looks is not your muscles but your complexion and skin tone.
I would say the gym can change your life comepletely by giving you the testosterone and stamina levels. I would force any son I had to go to the gym even if its a chore to myself at times.
Well I don’t blog about my looks anymore robert simply because theyve declined horribly over the past year. I’ve cratered in 2 jobs now as a banker and consultant. Lost hair, put on weight (due to meds) and my t levels were the same as an 80 year old man before I used some ‘medical’ solutions.
In all reality, without modern ‘medical’ and medical solutions, I would have gone the same way as my mother did and basically become a kind of hollowed out angry ghost of a person.
In my prime I would say I looked like a movie star. I’ve been told that by women of all races.
You got me rollin’😂 How do you come up with this stuff???
Paranoid Schizo (left). Jewish producer nepotist hire (right).
In my mind la la la la la,
I can see La La La La
What someone la la la la
Means to me.
Deal with it is right about one thing. I tend to automatically label people as soon as they come onto the screen when Im watching tv.
True detective is a good show. But I will think of the actors filmography or real life sexual history immediately upon sight. Or I might remember a character actor from another movie or tv show they did. I’m extremely quick at knowing what shows and movies actors have been in. I used to work in a video store and just remembered the directors, actors, and their roles.
The detective aspect in this show is great because I use my special psychology powers and try to figure out the criminal.
I would not be a million miles off hannibal lecter in human assesment truth be told. I am that guy that looks at a persons nose shape, eye tilt, or colour of fingernails to tell social class, smoking habit, conscientiousness etc.
I can actually make a good stab at doing something that would be this clinical to someone in person. I have done it in the past in parts here to correct results.
I can diagnose mental illness and the type from the eyes usually.
I would say you are all not aware of something very interesting and shocking about one of the commenters here.
the correct answer is that those countries which recognize palestine are not under the control of zion. all others are, either directly via their jewish population or indirectly via american influence. and the only reason why the Us is the world’s policeman after dec 26 1991 is zion. the military industrial complex and oil don’t explain it.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Palestine_recognition_only.svg
http://www.evoanth.net/2017/08/01/neanderthal-genes-neanderthal-skulls/?utm_content=buffer8d902&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2012/aug/02/africa-kenya
Gooooood
Now [redacted by pp, aug 2, 2017] will destroy their natural environment aka fauna et flora emulating shat albinid [redacted by pp, aug 2, 2017] from the north already did some centuries before.
http://meinnaturwissenschaftsblog.blogspot.com.br/2017/07/creativity-and-genius.html?m=1
https://mobile.twitter.com/morgoth_rev/status/891702756624527360/photo/1
Jones is a very charismatic guy hahaha.
He talks like I do in real life.
Without meds.
The man is fucking unhinged. Even if he makes sense.
There’s like,no way Alex Jones is 43.and,no way he’s an Aquarius. sory but Aquarius’ don’t talk that way. AJ talks like a pro-wrestler. Remember the “New World Oarder” wrestling team in the 90’s? Or,his close relationship with Jesse Ventura who hoasted “Conspiracy Theory” another fake conspiracy show like the Alex Jones show.but,back to my original point. AJ is a toatal fire sign.the way he blows his top,and is like abrasive. think fellow Sag Chris Matthews for a comparison. Bill Hicks was a Sagittarius.that’s far moar believable that Jones is a Sag than an Aquarius. i had a Sag tell me once that AJ acts like a Sag and i agree. it’s sooo funy that Astrology is the dead give-away that AJ is playing a character,and isn’t like who he says he is. don’t get me wrong,i luv the Alex Jones show and have been a subscriber for like 15 years. he’s one of my favorite famous people ever but he’s knot like,self-made.he’s a plant and like because of this where you can like toataly
Alex jones is off the reservation.
Hahaha. I havent laughed this much in a long time.
Hes technically wrong about the right of arms. It was for a militia to resist an expected british invasion. Hes maybe philosophically right though, a citizenry with access to millitary grade weaponry is harder to boss physically. So it has to be psychologically.
Good point by alex, most mass slaughters have been government thugs in Russia/China/Cambodia. An armed citizenry would have made those things far harder.
Also he brings up that Feinstein brought in an arms control bill.
As you all know, Feinsten, Senate Intelligence Committee head is supposed to regulate the CIA/NSA.
In actual fact her job is to block anything that comes their way. As she is part of the Zionist cabal.
Alex has clearlybeen reading rj rummel books lately. rj rummel was a Libra.
Rummel had a good book on Factor Analysis I wanted Pumpkin to read but I don’t think he read it.
I forgot where I put that book at.
I don’t believe pacas is over the age of 13. It’s not possible.
it’s obvious the strict constructionist interpretation of the second amendment does not protect the right to bear arms, and it hasn’t since the US has had a professional/full-time military.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
After the war the Continental Army was quickly disbanded as part of the American distrust of standing armies, and irregular state militias became the new nation’s sole ground army, with the exception of a regiment to guard the Western Frontier and one battery of artillery guarding West Point’s arsenal. However, because of continuing conflict with Native Americans, it was soon realized that it was necessary to field a trained standing army. The first of these, the Legion of the United States, was established in 1791.
the bill of rights was ratified dec 15, 1791.
so the second amendment was meaningless before it was even law. sad!
and it’s not as if other developed countries have banned fire arms. just fire arms for purposes other than hunting. killing animals you eat is the only excuse to have a gun. hand guns and machine guns etc should be banned. the NRA is full of retards.
https://pixels.com/featured/dianne-feinstein-at-dance-underwood-archives.html
Dianne Feinstein was very good looking when she was younger.
I think what happens to many pols, is they start off idealistic and then get co opted into the permanent government of the deep state as they rise through the system. I expect this is the same for high rank journalists, judges, millitary men etc. They get invited to the nomenclatura.
Feinstein is a true believer, or was. Now she just runs defense on anyone questioning the CIAs right to topple left wing governments in Latam which is a sad end to her youthful optimism. She reminds me a lot of why I was a liberal.
https://diva.sfsu.edu/collections/sfbatv/bundles/190230
Obama to his credit tried his best to stick to his ideals. Obama is actually a good guy legitimately. It must have pained him to have the cia torture bradley manning.
But he pardoned him thank god.
It must blow robert, gman and pumpkins mind that I can praise a black president and then criticise blacks in general.
Its almost like I can think of them as seperate entities in my head!
No, it doesn’t surprise me.
Then why do I get stupid comments on whether I love jews just because I like some jew writers and philosophers?
I remember robert bashed me for spinoza. I don’t like spinoza because hes jewish. I like the way he described the god I would tend to believe in.
Same with Freud, Popper, Marx, or even Ron Unz.
I guess I thought your love of Marx and Freud was a little surprising because they’re so closely linked with Jewish culture.
But I can understand [rest of comment redacted by pp, Aug 4, 2017]
“marx” is really marx and engels.
It shocks me to imagine you guys don’t get bored talking about the same shit all of the time.
I know I don’t. In my last 10 posts Ive covered arms control, the deep state, political careers, psychiatry, True detective tv show, football and the london property market.
You only think I talk about the same thing, because the emotional salience of what I say about you beloved minorities is 1st order sort in your mind.
And why is it first order? –
Denmark.
No, all that shit is effectively repetition on a theme that you won’t get off.
And you know it.
I don’t even know why you’re being defensive.
It’s becoming more and more likely in my mind that with all of this obsession with politics on your part you literally have some form of autism that shrinks missed. I honestly recommend getting it checked out.
Circle my last 10 posts for jew wrods. Less than half will mention jews in more than a very passing way.
Its just more salient to you because youre defensive about it.
“Nooooo I’m not repeating myself endlessly at all I swear, see, I didn’t say the word Jew!”
Accept that you’re a broken record. If you want to know the truth of it, I don’t even read your comments anymore because I can predict their contents. You haven’t written anything interesting or original since you mentioned the intelligent investor and the Devil’s chessboard, and I’m not the kind of guy that won’t give you props for two excellent book tip-offs but if you don’t realize that after that you started going around in circles then you really are mad, repeating something endlessly and hoping for different results is supposedly the definition of insanity after all.
I’ll give you a little credit for your defense of Obama though, even though I personally think he did more to advance the credibility of the socio-political left wing ultimately hamstringing right wing progress metapolitically, I think you’re right about the effectiveness of his anti-trust legislation.
Yes ive said obamas presidnecy will be remembered as a dark peruod in american history for the cultural upheavel.
Hes like a reverse reagan. Good policy. Bad influence.
THIS BLOG NEVER GETS BORING
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry
Mysterious. I would bet a lot of the anti Khazar studies were funded by rich jews eager to vindicate creating Israel.
I would simply say that ashkenazi jews look much different from their sephardi cousins.
And we know jews were not allowed marry christians or gentiles for centuries, so the lineage is preserved.
I would think the Khazar hypothesis hasn’t been debunked. But I’m not a geneticist. I’m just using common sense. Armenians and jews share very similar personalities and abilities.
To prove Khazar, I think you would need to look at whether armenians and jews have the same genetics. Not focus on jews per se. Are armenians over represented in law and media? I think they are. So similar neuro-cognition.
Yea it’s something very notable. Jews and namely on the east are mostly armenid.
ashkenazi jews are also distinct from mizrahi jews or palestinians and lebanese in appearance. they’re much fairer. more likely to have red hair, blue eyes, freckles, etc. yiddish is a germanic language. any interbreeding population will be distinguishable genetically.
Jews were frequently depicted with red hair in Medieval times. Like Shylock from Shakespeare.
I knew a half Jew in high school that looked straight up Irish (his mom was Jewish his dad English-ancestry). I knew a couple of Jewish girls with blonde hair/blue eyes.
http://www.trbimg.com/img-5702d60a/turbine/la-robertkardashianoj-la0005552286-20160401/1300/1300×731
Did someone post this on this blog already? Anyhow, pick out the Jew…
this is obvious to me, but i admit such ability is not analytic or conscious. it’s like perfect pitch. you have it or you don’t. to my eye kardashian does NOT look jewish. shapiro DOES.
it’s funny that armenia doesn’t recognize palestine, but every country within 1,000 miles of it does.
they must think they need the jews to publicize their own genocied at the hands of the turk during ww i.
they want mt ararat apparently. this is the only reparations i’ve heard suggested.
but trukey is right not to admit it…even if it’s true. because once they do it will be an endless headache.
kirk kirkorian funded the recent super expensive movie about it. he was the richest armenian american. maybe the only one on the forbes 400. and he had made a lot buying and selling some studio.
despite its YUGE expense i expect some may not have heard of it.
The Promise
cost: $90m. i recall seeing it was closer to 200.
box office: $8m
according to wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Promise_%282016_film%29
is that the most pathetic thing you’ve ever heard of? or what?
Schindler’s List?
Budget $22 million[2]
Box office $321.2 million
[rest of comment redacted by pp, aug 5, 2017]
They are very tetchy about people saying the ashkenazis are not the original levantine jews because obviously they would have no right of return.
But DNA studies do suggest middle eastern genetics.
But heres the kicker: many armenids and turkic tribes that settled in the caucus region were originally from that region themselves!
I would say ashkenzis are closer to armenians/georgians/azerbijanis than palestinians, lebanese, eygptians based on temperament, aesthetic and cognitive ability.
That strangest thing about all this, is that jewish history is this shrouded in mystery. I.e. records are being hidden, left unpublished or burned.
O.G
Original Georgian.
it’s funny if you think about it.
dzhugashvili was a russian nationalist who wasn’t russian and spoke russian in a thick accent.
Was uncle joe a nationalist? Theres nothing i see that would say that. He wasnt a communist either. Hes more like putin than gorbachev. Gorbachev was a nationalist.
it’s clear at this point that trump will go to war with n korea.
the chinese can stop the n koreans in a trice, but they refuse to, because they don’t want a US ally on their border. in this case the chinese are stupid.
If you look at alt right alexa rankings, vox day and heartiste are more popular than most celeb gossip sites ex. radar online, TMZ and dailymail.
Dailymail is fairly traditional conservative. TMZ is jewish so therefore promotes black men in every story or asks why X isnt sleeping with a black man.
When you consider no traditional media link into the alt right part of the internet, its amazing. Truly amazing.
Sailer/UNZ is lower down. Sailer is kind of the Velvet Underground of the alt right. All the leaders read him. And many conservative pundits secretly. I bet Tucker and Bannon reads Sailer.
I think the jews have stopped mentioning the alt right in trad media because its now a very scary phenomenon. They tried to still birth it by killing Milo and associating those guys making hitler salutes at spencers talk with the alt right. And it failed.
They are genuinely scared enough to try to ignore it.
By the end of the year, I expect a celebrity will say something alt right in public. Probably a musician like kid rock.
By the end of trumps presidency, the alt right will have completely devoured the cuckolds due mainly to higher IQ/higher testosterone analysis and arguments. And the neocons will flee to the last fragments of the dying democrat party.
The democrat party true believers c 2018.
I bet Jimmy Dore is even thinking why all the [redacted by pp, aug 4, 2017] democrats are all jews. With the important exception of Bernie of course.
You realize Milo’s a neocon and was funded and promoted by neocons as a way of co-opting the alt-right movement? Conspiracies do exist but you lack the social IQ to correctly identify or interpret them, so please stay in your lane.
Hahaha. Good old pumpkin.
You contradict yourself. The media went out of its way to kill him.
No the media went out of their way to promote him. Bill Maher put him on HBO & there was constant coverage of the trouble he was causing in college campuses
His career was killed because a Canadian high school girl discovered old audio of him defending pedophilia
The character assasination was their work. Bill maher is not a neocon puppet.
The character assasination was their work.
It was his actual comment that did him in.
Bill maher is not a neocon puppet.
Didn’t imply he was, but the MSM defines the boundaries of acceptable political debate and the fact that Milo was allowed on HBO shows he falls within those boundaries.
Youve got all the parties and motivations wrong.
No pill, it’s you who has it wrong. You think of Jewish influence as one hyper-organized conspiracy running all Western countries like a finely oiled machine. The reality is much messier and subtler. There are pockets of conspiracies among Jewish elites, just like there are among elites from every interest group, but not all Jewish elites are alike, they don’t all have the same agenda and to the extent that they do, they don’t all have the same strategy for achieving it: some are liberal, others are conservative. For some advancing Jewish interests is a conscious calculated goal, while for others ethnocentric motives are on a level they’re not even consciously aware of if they exist at all.
Some are huge Trump supporters because they think the best way to advance Jewish interests is unconditional support for Israel (sheldon adelson); others were Obama supporters (George Soros) because on a subconscious level they perhaps believe the best way to advance Jewish interests is to create multicultural societies. Others combine BOTH of these views to varying degrees and still others are just genuinely honest people looking for the truth with little ethnocentric agenda (Ron Unz).
Milo was advanced and promoted by the Sheldon Adelson types. He was hated by many George Soros type Jews, but still others took the pragmatic view that if we must have an alt-right movement, it’s much better to have a Jewish friendly one headed by Milo than an anti-Semitic one headed by the usual suspects, so he was allowed some major platforms.
That isn’t true simply because of the fact they beheaded the guy. Nothing you can say would make sense. The more obvious explanation is that milo was becoming a massive influence and a gay man who curtsied to blacks was the only alt right figure any media figure would allow on a tv show. They are hardly going to get an extremely good looking, hetero, masculine, well spoken man to explain how the jews control their minds.
If you wanted a ‘leader’ it wouldnt be a (supposed) gay magic negro worshipper anyway.
If you look through my entire comment history I never said it was 1 global conspiracy controlled from a bunker outside Langley. Think of it as 1 very large conspiracy – involving wall street jews, neocon pol operatives, spy agencies, the media and so on –
and many smaller or interconnected ones. Like a tree with branches.
In my mind, the multiculti stuff has taken on a life of its own as the brainwashed devotees have expanded on it from the original jewish direction. This is why anime confuses the followers with the originators.
Similarily, the old millitary industrial war profiteers and oil companies have a say as well for more war.
Ive always said that some jews are not ‘in on it’. Like Soros, or Stephen Miller or even some elements of Hollywood like Oliver Stone and the like.
Mid level and below jews in society are vaguely aware their lobby is the most powerful. They will reframe it of course or deny it, but wont know the overall agenda of the Rubin, Singer, Schwarzmanns of this world. Still less what mossad/cia (same thing) is told to do. They are lied to alot as well actually.
1) milo is Jewish
2) Milo’s financial backers were jewish
3) milo did not criticize jews
4) milo was a neocon
Liberal Jews may have played a part in destroying milo but neocon Jews were the ones that created him, so what the fuck is your point?
You realize there are pro-trump jews right, including all of trump’s grandkids.
You realize Israel is virtually the most pro-trump country on earth and that a huge chunk of trump’s base is pro-Israel
What you don’t seem to get is there are major divisions even among ethnocentric Jews. There are also major divisions among trump supporters and trump is playing both sides by dog whistling to antisemites with his holocaust omissions while also keeping his Jewish and evangelical supporters by standing loyal to Israel. Both philosemitic and antisemetic Trump supporters are united by shared islamophobia
That’s the fundamental question, in the end will always have a jewish interests while among whitard gentiles always will have a abstraction-goal.
How can you prove that you’re more correct than Pill PP*
How can you prove that this sub-divisions are fakes*
how do you know milo is jewish? because he said so?
who are his jewish “financial backers”?
name one.
breitbart was NOT jewish. he was a gentile adopted by jews.
So you think MiLo lied about being half-Jewish and gay to have crossover appeal? I don’t think so.
breitbart was NOT jewish. he was a gentile adopted by jews
It doesn’t matter whether he was genetically Jewish or not. That’s not how EGI works. People are loyal to whatever race reminds them of the people they grew up around. You can even trick a newborn to bond with a mother of a different species.
[redacted by pp, aug 6, 2017]
It doesn’t matter whether he was genetically Jewish or not.
a knee-slapper. hilarious. hahaha!
So you think MiLo lied about being half-Jewish and gay…
YES! and he never even claimed to be half jewish. at most he claimed to be 1/4 jewish. is harrison ford jewish? he’s 1/4 jewish.
if milo hasn’t been ruined you will live to see the headline…
milo gets married…to a woman
I don’t think so mug of pee. Although the stigma against being gay has decreased a lot in the last 30 years, not many straight guys would feign gayness 24/7 just on the slim chance it would help their career. And girls who fucked him in college and high school would likely have outed him by now, though he could always claim he was in denial back then
He may be lying about having fucked black guys however
Just a nice tune for the day.
These french guys are very gifted as well.
Vice magazine write an article saying trumps dad was in the KKK.
Hahahahaha.
I cant stop laughing.
GayJam continue to talk about things… he don’t know or know the basics [but he think it know ALL about]
And yes, he just REPEAT the same things since i started to follow (((hdd)) shphere…
Hdds seems lack on creativity.
yitzhak rabin is an example.
he looks jewish, at least in some pictures, but…
i can’t believe that any ancient israelite looked like him.
so then there’s this ur-hbd claim…the ashkenazim…and to some extent the sephardic too…
if they had no euopean genes they’d be just like the lebanese…
accomplished in some ways but not world beaters.
it was only by mixing with europeans that jews are worthy of mention among the peoples of the earth.
so barbados and the bahamas are counterexamples to the “black countries have to be shit holes” narrative.
but barados is 5% white massas, and the bahamas is 10% white massas.
Both are part of commowealth; their elites seems less predactive and more diverse; they are little countries. Seychelles is other example.
Well administered even Haiti can become less poor and dysfunctional.
Being a tax haven also helps.
i change my mind…sort of…
america could work if the wage scale were a lot flatter. and if america were a pure meritocracy. tests only.
not totally flat like it was in the soviet union.
just a lot flatter than it is.
that is, jews might be close to 15% of masters, but…
there would be black masters, and…
those blacks and whites who weren’t masters would not resent their non-black or jewish masters.
again. all black men who think they’re smart should worship paul robeson.
[rest of comment redacted by pp, aug 5, 2017]
america could work if the wage scale were a lot flatter. and if america were a pure meritocracy. tests only
That takes all the fun out of it. Besides there’s more to merit than IQ.
How would you compress the wage scale? One thing I was thinking is that minimum wage should vary by the size of the company, so huge conglomerates with thousands of employees should have to pay a high minimum wage to their employees, while small businesses should not have to pay any minimum wage. This would prevent the Forbes 400 from getting too rich while allowing small businesses to thrive.
just ask yourself…
why is inequality a GOOD thing?
at least to SOME extent?
A simple solution is to enforce the fordist compromise. The assasination of jfk by the 400 stopped that.
peepee may or may not be glad to learn that i have received a liver transplant, and my body has accepted it.
i have received a liver from an elephant.
my brain will shrink.
but i will still live.
the din is insufferable. “socialism doesn’t work. communism doesn’t work.”
let’s see. why didn’t “it” work?
1. flat wage structure. too little incentive.
2. central planning?
3. decisions for large organizations were not made by the owners of such organizations…exactly like the US after 1900.
the stupidty of a person has a very strong correlation with his opinion of communism.
PRC + 500m out of poverty.
rest of developing world – 100m into poverty.
yet 99% of the people in the US are so fucking retarded they buy into capitalism.
1. the soviet union DID work…considering it built on the ruins of the russian empire it worked spectacularly.
2. so far as it didn’t work…for soviets…it was due to the flat wage structure…not to anything else.
but to prove the nazis right…
DOES PEEPEE ACTUALLY WANT THE TRUTH?
NO THE TALK
NOT THE JIVE
NOT THE IDEOLOGY?
???
from this thread lion exposes himself again as a clue-less jewish supremacist.
what does “anti-semite” or better “anit-jew” even mean?
“PoorGradStudent” starts it.
https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2017/08/03/how-can-harvard-fight-back/#comments
you can tell who i am.
Whats wrong with you? Youre more respectful in those comments. The old mugabe would have thrashed lion for being a hypocrite.
If it was based on iq, surely gebtiles would still not be underrepresented as hispanics and blacks are not up there.
Harvard isnt a uni. Its more a social club. Its got more in common with a cohntry club than a uni.
elite american unis are hedge funds masquerading as “institutions of higher education”.
the “old mugabe” wouldn’t have been posted.
lion’s irrelevant blog is a microcosm of mass media in america…what is allowed…what is not allowed.
i still think (((mike wallace)))’s The Homosexual has the best clip which explains my pov on the judenfrage.
the jew is right. the gentile plays the role of the jew.
I don’t know if the self-declared big-brained Ian Smith here know BUT almost everything about morality on the western world IS christian, included its irrational hater and misunderstood about homossexuality OR better, human psychological/sexual diversity.
So, almost of this retarded whitey you worship is just saying some chapter of sacred-bubble, re-read, JEWISH sacred-bubblet.
it’s so easy.
why do the masters have higher pay than their slaves?
in pro sports everywhere the coach makes less than the highest paid player.
makes less than his pupil in individual sports like tennis.
if masters are necessary why are they not just another member of the team?
does lebron reject his coach’s orders?
does he say, “fuck you. you make so much less than me. i’ll do what i want.”
???
does he say that???
maximal economic efficiency is very NOT capitalist.
sad!
“weev” is right about everything…
even though if one trusted mass media he’s 5’4″ and jewish.
i doubt it.
but even if…
the alt-right will never win if its fights with its own.
the elite count on the paraguayan war among all those who might overthrow them.
it’s so fucking sickening.
macdonald and griffith are SAINTS.
macdonald is so OBVIOUSLY…
HONEST…
TRANSPARENT!
sorry…10 chartreuse and tonic-s…
i meant nick griffin, cambridge grad. he’s fat, but he’s not stupid.
it’s funny. i’ll break ranks.
a marginal movement will be led by marginal people.
gross people.
spencer is such a fag i could conquer his “movement” in a year.
i’m better looking
i have a better voice.
my arguments would be better.
peepee doesn’t get it.
most americans don’t want to think about it.
99.99…%
of americans think that kim jong un got the memo…
the memo about communism sucking…
he never got it fucktards…
it’s inevitable.
ideology kills.
trump WILL inundate n korea with bombs.
he can.
he is sooper dooper pro military.
maybe. but he was against the Iraq War (which was smart)
but pill is right.
ceteris paribus the man who looks like “i will rape you, kill you, and throw your body in the thames.”
is the one women go for.
they can’t help it.
no….
(?)
Avg IQ less than 90 seems can work well when they are in tiny numbers: less than 2 million inhabitants, because seems both people, with lower and higher IQ [neurotypical spectrum at least] ”evolved” to live in densely sparsed environments. Indeed, average joey is the apex of domestication and [un] perfect fitness to densely populated [human] environments. And domestication is also the levels of hypo-boringness., namely for those who are hyper-extrospective or active.
”reason”
I hope this comment will not be stupidly censored.
The problem is not you try to polite the comments but do it in stupid/erratic ways.
Ok lets not talk about jews.
Lets talk about epistemology a bit.
Im watching a detective show called true detective. In the show every episode you get clues or the case progresses.
What is a good question is how many clues you need in certain situations. The mcconaghy character is a genius who can shoot from the hip. Whereas hos normal partner says he jumps to conclusions far to quickly.
Theres an issue ive tried to explain before about how certain people do not need to do a controlled experiment to figure out their wife is cheating. Its unneccessary to do genetic analysis to know races differ in personality iq and testosterone. But people need to do it more for political proofing than core knowledge.
I suppose the level of brai washing in a society requires asperger e methods.
What i would put forward is that there are 2 issues with ahooting from the hip:
1. ERROR
2. YOU CAN ONLY BE RIGHT IF PEOPLE BELIEVE YOU ARE RIGHT (REFLEXIVITY)
The kind of large knowledge leaps are from profound breaks with prior etiquette.
In the discussion of knowledge, its best to take wild educated stabs than ant crawling. We have academia for ant crawling. And it produces nothing.
Another corollary.
Philosophy is not dead.
A further iteration:
Philosophy is dead because it tries to do ant crawling.
A final addenendum:
It was purposely mutilated into legal scholarship because it is dangerous for a descartes, marx, neitsche or a schopenhauer to emerge again. Nothing scares the elite like thomas paine intellectuals punching holes in orthodoxy. This is something a tesla or galileo cannot accomplish.
Discuss with reference to the ‘big man’ theory of history.
In most peoples minds. People associate social change with scientists. If you read a histry book and circle the people that caused people to change their mind programming. About 10% were scientists.
Einstein doesnt chang the eay i see reality.
But spinoza did.
The reflexivity iszues posed by soros is veru good. I teally enjoy it because it introduces a borges like loop de loop weirdness in knowledge. For example if you say with authority that person is cool, with enough repetition the person will be, even if h onjectively was not.
It even works on scientific studies where the academic will repeat the experminet to correspond with orthodoxy in most fields.
Or a person will interpret the clues to fit their received programming.
You can think of large knowledge leaps like punching an amorphous purple blob and hoping it cocoons around your fist with enough precision and force. Otherwise you will bounce back.
Soroa saw it in the financial markets.
Why did thailands bhat fail? He said so.
Hahahaha.
In physcis theres is the weridness of the cat in the box. The atoms will form as the electrcitiy for better word focuses on a molecular atructure. I would guess it has some relation to this jose luis borges type property in reality.
Borges!
My favourite writer.
The lottery is a great short story.
But who cab forget the religious fanatic in the amazon remembering a dream.
Or the lost nation of xxxxx – a very ornate satire among intellectuals?
Borges is without doubt someone who could literally make you question your senses.
I think socrates was right. Not because the more you know the more you dont know is because things have an objective relationship and are in and of themselves solid pieces of knowledge and previous explanations are not precise enough.
But because you learn to appreciate that knowledge iaround certain things is in and of itself changing based on the observer/writer describing it.
Its borges again.
Im not oblivious to the wittgenstein argument that words have meaning in the sense of rewiring synapses and the like either. But wittgenstein numps the shark becauae even with a faded flashlight, there are other flashlights to corroborate and point to the objects in the room.
Lion has such intense cognitive dissonance its a waste of time debating him. I am banned from his forum. Thats the way i like it.
Unz shows much truer regard for knowledge in and of itself. In this way unz is a good example of someone whos iq is too high to make him tell lies . I suspect unz must lie on the spectrum a bit. A person with those insights as a jew would normally hide it with semantics or simply bury the facts.
Robert is right that verbal intelligence is about predation a bit. I would bet people with high viqs are less affective empathetic and more cobitively empathetic and high q is vice versa.
I believe high q people gebuinely can feel peoples pain.
Like many women in fact. Women have cognitive empathy as well though. Thats why you have more women novelists than physicists or computer programmers.
At the upper stratum many high viq women i suspect are goldiggers or use their bodies for respurces.
Sharon stone has a very high iq apparently.
Communism actually works where a state entrepeneur is needed. That female italian economist wrte many good papers on it. I cant remember her name.
In economics theres a fairly religious belief that ‘the market’ is not just more efficient but morally better.
Ive always questioned the moral part more than the efficiency bit.
Moat econ papers you can read between the lines and almost feel the fear of communism baiting the timid aspergers mans mind.
Tylor cowen is the absolute worst. Chris dillow speaks a lot of sense. But hes somewhat aspergers and doesnt see that distribution matter more than overall production.
Ive always argued diatribution of income is a meta efficiency variable.
Production is a function of income. Theres a fairly aspergery way to eveb make production dependent on income streams of high marginal propensity to consume actors. For some ‘stange’ reason this isimple tweak is not done in modelling.
So isntead we get mr applied math guy saying employers spend all the money on wages, incestment and savings which are always fed back into the econ.
What fuckin dopes.
spergs are very capable of learning the ruling ideology, but they are incapable of recognizing it as ideology.
in this way, as i have commented before, the most socially intelligent people will appear to lack social intelligence to their inferiors in social intelligence.
there was actually an episode of House, M.D. where house is suspected of “having” aspergers.
i agree with pill that the most accomplished gentiles seem to be ass-burgers.
They’re very capable of recognizing it as ideology if they thought about it, they just don’t care because they’re benefiting from it and they simply don’t care if Jews as a group are benefiting more. That’s not their problem except on an ethnic genetic level which often gets suppressed during prosperous times. When resources get scarce, then you and pill will finally see how “socially intelligent” people are.
People here think autists are aliens, lol.
In my view people such Jewckerburg and Gates are not exactly a typical proto aspiea…
what i meant by “ideology” above is not what you think it means.
like most words it can mean many things. polysemy.
i’m using it in marx’s sense.
much less than 1% of the population of the US and canada knows what this means.
if you think aspies are capable of identifying ideology, then you don’t know what “ideology” means.
What I’m saying is most accomplished people, if they thought long, hard and honestly about it, would realize the system isn’t fair, they just don’t use their intelligence to get the truth because ignorance is bliss so sometimes it’s smart not to know.
I’ve never read Marx and never will so I’ll never know why people think he’s such a Genius. Most of his points sound like common sense (the rich exploit and manipulate the poor) but maybe there’s a deeper meaning:
Ideology according to Marx is a veil pulled over the economic base in order to prevent people from seeing its inherit injustice (that is, until communism comes). Ideology convinces people that the current state of production is justified, warranted, “natural” or anything else which gets them to comply to it. Ideology has been famously referred to my Marx as “false consciousness”. Revolutions come about when the fallacy of this consciousness is recognized
How does Marx distinguish between a natural economy and a man-made one? Was wealth inequality “natural” in the Stone Age? What does natural even mean? Humans are a product of nature so any system we construct is natural on some level.
in terms of social intelligence the savant of the ancient world was…
diogenes.
in “intellectual space” this claim is confirmed.
dr house is a cynic.
House’s character has been described as a misanthrope, cynic, narcissist, and curmudgeon, the last of which was named one of the top television words of 2005 in honor of the character.
“cynic” and “Cynic” are related terms. they have a “family resemblance”, but they don’t mean the same thing.
the world’s most famous living Cynic is Ted Kaczynski.
Cynicism is a philosophy. it’s not just masturbating in public…a stunt of diogenes.
First of all you must need understand what autism and asperger are. Most masses are not autistic, otherwise.
Ideology at priori is just study of ideas whatever what.
What most people don’t understand is that current ideologies, cultures and religions are basically the same thing but most on the left tend to think ideology is not or cannot be a religion and most/many on the right think religion is not ideology. Both laugh about fake gods of both side. Just like a Croatian laughing on Serbian as if they were completely different people.
that’s a good definition, except…
the 99% don’t need to have the “wool pulled over their eyes”.
they will pull it over their eyes themselves.
this is called the “just world hypothesis”.
social psychology can be a science. it has a lot to say.
Social or any other fragmentation of.. philosophy, on humanities, suffer from ”over-fordistic subdivision” on academic world/bubble. So, seems obvious people on the sociology, for example, will always believe that social factors are hugely important for everything about human behavior, it’s their business, and based on multiple perspectives, they are not totally wrong. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature, sociology there is to over-enphasise social factors as well any academic sub-division do, over-value their own side. Social factors are their God, onipresent, oniscient, onipotent.
Other question is that genetics IS a automation of psychology.
Or people lack on self confidence to trust in novel point of views, and specially those that are better analyzed, or people are over-self-confident all the time AND bear in mind that modern ideologies ARE capitalistic products, they were designed to certain set of public and to reflects greatly what many of this specific public believe.
panis et CIRCENSIS
good on santo.
most on the left tend to think ideology is not or cannot be a religion and most/many on the right think religion is not ideology.
religion in brazil is ideology.
anecdote: my parents did their peace corp in bahia, the blackest of brazil’s states. they were suspected of being spies. my mom had been a catholic. she quit the church after seeing “fat monks telling women they’d go to hell if they practiced birth control”.
but in another sense she never quit the church.
as religion goes…the roman church is gold. everything else is base metal.
In 1955, von Neumann was diagnosed with what was either bone or pancreatic cancer.[174] He invited a Roman Catholic priest, Father Anselm Strittmatter, O.S.B., to visit him for consultation.[16] Von Neumann reportedly said in explanation that Pascal had a point, referring to Pascal’s Wager.[175][176][177] Father Strittmatter administered the last rites to him.[16] Some of von Neumann’s friends (such as Abraham Pais and Oskar Morgenstern) said they had always believed him to be “completely agnostic.”[176][178] Of this deathbed conversion, Morgenstern told Heims, “He was of course completely agnostic all his life, and then he suddenly turned Catholic—it doesn’t agree with anything whatsoever in his attitude, outlook and thinking when he was healthy.”[179] Father Strittmatter recalled that von Neumann did not receive much peace or comfort from it, as he still remained terrified of death.
peepee should watch Brideshead. she might be converted.
religion in general is ideology.
just in an extended sense.
[redacted by pp, aug 6, 2017]
true christians are the world’s BIGGEST ATHEISTS.
jean-luc marion turned me on. so some french can think. some.
Explain true christians are the biggest atheists….