[Please place all off-topic comments here. They will not be posted in the main articles]
When most people talk about “elites”, they’re talking about who has the most power. But power is only as good as what you do with it, so to me, the real elites are those with influence. Those who have changed history and actually made a difference, especially the difference they wanted to make. Roughly speaking, the more different the world is, then it would have been, had you never lived, the more influential you are.
Of course we can’t go back in a time machine and prevent people from being born, to see how big a difference their lives have made. But if we asked a dozen different historians to name the most influential people in history, they’d all name many of the same people (Jesus, the prophet Mohammad, Newton etc) proving there’s some objectivity to this.
When analyzing 2018’s list of the 100 most influential living people of all time, I found that although blacks are 15% of the World’s population, they are only 3% of the most influential (Oprah, Diana Ross, and “Kool Herc”). The number increases to 6% if you include Afro-multiracials such as Obama, Colin Powell, and Condi Rice. All are Americans.
Powell, primarily used his influence to advance the interests of others, so I would not consider him an elite. Rice was influential more by what she failed to prevent, then by what she actually intended, so I would not consider her an elite either. But the other blacks all used their influence to advance their own agendas and thus qualify as elites.
Even though Ashkenazi Jews are only 0.14% of the World’s population, they’re roughly half the World’s 100 most influential people. Sadly one of these (Bernard Lewis) recently passed away, opening up a slot for a newcomer on 2019’s list.
Although they are listed for their impact on history, one listee (Bob Woodward) is having a huge impact right now, for his new book about Trump, which claims his aids are secretly against him. Just as Woodward helped drive one president to paranoia back in the 1970s, he may be doing the same today.
Pumpkin Person 
iirc according to dating sites, white women in the US are the world’s biggest sexual racists. 90% of them say no to any non-white man. i expect it’s similar for fags and dykes. sexual attraction is NOT pc, and it can NOT be forced (to be pc). you’re attracted or you aren’t.
how is it actually possible to be a non-racist and at the same time be a sexual racist?
[redacted by pp, sept 7, 2018]
muggy proves once again that he is an ignorant slut
coupling and attraction are two different things.
the race barrier in dating is about the social aspect of romance and status.
i.e. a black man competing with an average middle-class white man for the same type of woman, would have to likely be making >200k yearly to compete.
sexual attraction is programmed.
the comfort aspect is just familiarity — which is why averageness (relative to the population the individual has been exposed to) is attractive.
the arousal part of it is having an image/person/type associated with certain feelings/situations/actions.
for example, a woman grows up and sees her father and her mother.
however her father treats her mother, assuming her mother loves her father (puts up with it), will likely be the type of behavior she will prefer as well.
women are attracted to all types of men — because their individual experiences/exposures differ. however, the above gateway of social judgment/status is what puts the limit on coupling. and it’s really about impulse control as to whether the woman acts on the attraction and has her indiscretions, and next it’s about priority of ‘social status’ versus sexual attraction with regard to coupling (or if she’s in the rare social circle where it wouldn’t matter, or if she’s just so high status that nothing could harm her social standing).
and contrary to muggy’s assertion…
sexual attraction CAN be made more PC.
it IS being made more PC.
More diversity initiatives, tighter control of media, different images played into people’s brains…
people are stupid and do what they’re told.
the realm of dating is no different.
What would be the IQ range for the powerful persons all over the world?
My list was influential, which is not quite the same as powerful. Dianna Ross for example had no power, but she was extremely influential in that she was the first glamorous black many people had ever seen, thus paving the way for racial change. I doubt she had a high IQ though, just the right talents and looks at the right time. But other influential people like the neocons are evil geniuses who masterminded U.S. foreign policy years in advance & selling their ideas to presidents, which takes a lot of IQ.
Overall I would say the 100 most influential people have IQs ranging from 105 to 175. The 100 most powerful people would probably be 100 to 170. Of course there are always outliers who fall outside these limits.
And they blackmail them and bribe them. That might also explain their influence.
Presidents are definitely bribed. They can’t get elected without powerful lobbyists raising money, and they’re offered $400 K a speech after their presidency by Goldman sachs types. There’s less evidence for blackmail, but they certainly know that if they get out of line they’ll get the Trump/Nixon treatment.
Woodward didnt do anything to nixon.
Nixon was removed. It could have been any journalist. But they wanted to use their own tribe.
The list is objective . You don’t care the reason why people have been influential on event and it’s not necessarily individual merit. Being chosen by an occult group would also do the trick. Else, you wouldn’t have individuals (and events)’but groups dynamics.
And even when people are chosen, they can still exercise independent influence by behaving in ways their choosers did not anticipate & do not want. Pill has trouble understanding this.
woodward isn’t jewish.
Robert has issues with understanding this as well. These people are selected. Ever notice the way woodward hasnt done anything except biographies of politicians after nixon? What ‘talent’ does this man have? He was chosen.
OMG a political biographer who only writes political biographies! What next? A chinese restaurant that only serves chinese food? Please use your talents to spot more of these secret plots pill.
Notice how it’s not enough for pill to argue that Jews are omnipotent. He must argue it’s a SECRET group of influential Jews, and not the Jews like bernstein whose influence can actually be documented.
not only does this violate occam’s razor, but the whole point of using frontmen would be to hide Jewish influence, so why would they use Jewish frontmen?
pill, do you ever wonder why even super politically incorrect blogs like unz don’t let you comment?
It’s because you make no sense.
Of course pill is right that Woodward & Bernstein did not singlehandedly take down Nixon. Their reporting would have meant nothing had a lot of other powerful people not been looking for an excuse to do so anyway. But their actions helped tip the balance against Nixon, so in that sense, they arguably changed history.
No it didnt. If they got run over by a bus 10 years before it happened, do you think they wouldn’t have found other reporters to circulate the story? Theres an article on Unz a few years ago mentioning how woodward and bernstein were just typical eager reporters looking to make a name and were given the info. The fact they have done no investigative journalism since the 70s isn’t a big clue?
They haven’t done any good journalism since because a) regression to the mean, b) getting old, and c) they had a unique hate for Nixon
Any president could have been brought down in the last 40 years if enemies had obsessed & powerful journalists to give dirt to. But you need to find a journalist who is prestigious, motivated, lucky & competent enough to maximize impact, so you can’t just say if it weren’t them it would have been someone else. That’s lazy oversimplified thinking.
No it isn’t. Its 100% true. These two ended up in a sinecure for the rest of their lives after. Although i suspect something is amiss with Bernstein.
The other striking thing is that Woodward should have gone (or be informed by plotters) about collusion with Russia to do to Trump what he did to Nixon. So just speaking about Temperament and Republican being not loyal to populism is a big failure. The op-ed was a mean to give relevance to the book. So it validates Phil theory (not his analysis) of an orchestrated choreography.
Your Bob Woodward is indeed already a major predictive asset of your list Pumpkin
Another arrogant comment.
You know, criticizing arrogance is cannibalism 😊
Elon Musk seems to have lost his mind. Must be doing a lot of drugs other than weed to be doing this stuff.
Although his response calling the guardian ‘insufferable’ was enjyoable.
Recently I’ve been smoking a lot of weed. I now prefer it to Adderall. I laughed hysterically when Joe Rogan offered Elon Musk his joint on his podcast, considering I was pretty high myself.
I’ve been smoking weed daily everyday for the past month or so. This Miami Kush gets me so fucked up I become practically paralyzed.
A few days while smoking a bowl I had a moment of clarity. I realized Mugabe must be a fiend himself. Because it explains his writing style so well.
*a few days ago
I have never taken in drugs. But several people say I look high (or lost) all the time, so I guess I must produce the substance naturally 😊
The main constituent of Adderall is present in the human brain. I believe it’s called cannabinoid. I also believe some people naturally have more of this stuff in their brain than others, in the same way some people naturally produce more dopamine.
I meant main constituent of marihuana
another eccentric genius like howard hughs on rogan today.
a lot of journos are novelists and screenwriters manque. woodward and bernstein likely made bank with their book and the movie All the President’s Men. and it’s not like they could’ve gone back to shoeleather journalism. too famous.
woodard doe slook a little jewy. maybe he has italian or native american ancestry.